• 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!

Jeh Johnson: Gun control is now a matter of homeland security

Glen Contrarian said:
A "mass shooting" is defined as one in which four or more people are shot (though not necessarily killed). In 2015, there were 372 mass shootings. In 2015, there were 220 days in which there were at least one mass shootings, and only 145 days without any mass shootings at all. In other words, days WITH mass shootings are now the NORM for life in America.

Really, what does it take for the Right to see that maybe, just maybe it's time for sensible gun control? I mean, how is it that the NRA actually opposes keeping people on the "no-fly" list to be prevented from legally purchasing firearms??? What is the possible sense in that?

The great majority of us on the Left do NOT want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. The only people claiming otherwise are conservative pundits and shills for gun manufacturers. What we DO want is sensible gun control to make it much more difficult for psychopaths, violent ex-felons, domestic abusers, drug dealers, terrorists (and their sympathizers), and the mentally-ill to have easy access to firearms...and to give law enforcement the tools it needs to go after gun smugglers, especially those who smuggle up to a quarter million firearms from America into Mexico each and every year.

Jeh Johnson is right - this IS a matter of national security, because the more mass shootings we have, the more it affects the national fabric that binds our nation together, and it affects us in many, many ways. For instance, "school lockdowns due to an armed threat or active shooter in the vicinity" hardly ever make more than the local news now and hardly ever make national news...whereas in other nations, such are almost unheard of. While there are mass shootings in other first-world nations, such are much, much rarer than here in America.

It is long past time for common-sense gun control in the forms of background checks for all sales (including at gun shows and online), registration for all firearms, required liability insurance for firearm ownership, and - every bit as important - required safety training for firearm ownership.

We can either do the above, and begin the long, slow process of making our streets safer...or we can continue allowing mass shootings to be the norm of daily life in America, rather than the very rare exception to the rule as in every other first-world nation on the planet.
Click to expand...

Funny that none of your suggestions would have hindered the Orlando shooting in the least.

Golly, would that make your "common sense" gun control utterly fruitless?
 
Henrin said:
What always strikes me about liberals response to mass shootings is that they know the solution .5 seconds after the mass shooting happened. What's the solution? GUN CONTROL! There is no looking over the case and determining the variables in play, just GUN CONTROL! What's hilarious about it is that many times the people that do the mass shootings would have already been barred from having guns from past gun control efforts by liberals.

And really, can we just eliminate home land security already? All the ****ing agency seems to do is violate the peoples rights.
Click to expand...

To be fair, if you could actually ban guns (by which i mean, 100% enforceable), it would have stopped the guy from using a gun. Much like many liberal solutions, its pie in the sky.
 
Last edited:
Glen Contrarian said:
A "mass shooting" is defined as one in which four or more people are shot (though not necessarily killed). In 2015, there were 372 mass shootings. In 2015, there were 220 days in which there were at least one mass shootings, and only 145 days without any mass shootings at all. In other words, days WITH mass shootings are now the NORM for life in America.
.
Click to expand...

It was already the norm. Criminals have been shooting each other in inner cities for decades. Before that they were knifing each other. Violent crime is normal for any society because there is a certain segment of society which doesnt care about consequences. And now we have muslims in our society which are being specifically told not to care.
 
soot said:
WTF?



The interpretation of law arising from the Constitutional is very much within the purview of the SCOTUS.

It's the Judicial branch's very first enumerated power.



Certainly.

And when it comes to our most fundamental rights as enumerated in the Constitution a mechanism has been provided for us to express those views - the amendment process.

We've done it seventeen times (not counting the ratification of the original ten amendments) since the Constitution has been adopted.

If we, the people, believe that a more restrictive or permissive interpretation of the Constitution is necessary, or that the Constitution itself needs to be changed, we have the means to impose our interpretation on ourselves and on government.
Click to expand...

The SC gave itself the power of judicial review arising from the Marbury v. Madison case. The language of the US Constitution provides for no such power.
 
Renae said:
Thus my point is proven. Thank you and have a nice day/


No, you claim "CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS" while at the same time utterly denying the very foundation of said rights, thus negating you as an honest debater of the matter.

Be honest, you believe in privileges, not Rights. Rights confer no obligation on another for you to exercise and the Government should be involved with a Natural Right as LITTLE as possible. You're view of "rights" is granted privileges from a benevolent government.
Click to expand...

You have gone over the edge ranting about things that make no sense in your zeal to attack me. Simply provide for me evidence that there is such a thing as a NATURAL RIGHT.

You cannot. You will not. You have not. In fact, in 300 years, the idea of natural rights has never advanced beyond a mere theory of willful belief.
 
Renae said:
Funny that none of your suggestions would have hindered the Orlando shooting in the least.

Golly, would that make your "common sense" gun control utterly fruitless?
Click to expand...

Why is the proposed solution to a societal and cultural problem that took centuries to develop expected to be implemented and realized in mere moments?

That is most unfair as well as extremely intellectually dishonest.
 
jonny5 said:
It was already the norm. Criminals have been shooting each other in inner cities for decades. Before that they were knifing each other. Violent crime is normal for any society because there is a certain segment of society which doesnt care about consequences. And now we have muslims in our society which are being specifically told not to care.
Click to expand...

While there certainly is in any society "a certain segment...which doesn't care about consequences", why, then, is America's homicide rate (and violent crime rate, and frequency of mass shootings) FAR higher than that of any other first-world nation? If it's no different here as anywhere else as you say, then the rates SHOULD be statistically similar...

...but they're anything but similar.

And when it comes to Muslims, try adding up all the Muslims who have committed terrorist acts in America - go ahead, add them all up - and then compare that total to the 3.3 million Muslims that are in America today. In other words, because of the acts of what is an almost microscopic minority of Muslims, the Right wants to blame and cast suspicions on the far greater whole who are good, law-abiding citizens and legal residents.

On a side note, on this same subject, the American Medical Association pointed out that 10% of ALL American physicians are Muslims. Compare that to the fact that the 3.3M Muslims in America comprise slightly over 1% of Americans...and that tells us that Muslims are almost ten times more likely to become doctors than the "normal" non-Muslim American.

Ah, but Trump and the increasingly-Islamophobic Right would never believe such stuff, 'cause obviously, the American Medical Association must have become a shill for ISIS....
 
Renae said:
Funny that none of your suggestions would have hindered the Orlando shooting in the least.

Golly, would that make your "common sense" gun control utterly fruitless?
Click to expand...

If we had our way, Mateen would not have been able to legally purchase firearms. But thanks to the Republicans....

Since the ISIS-inspired mass shooting in San Bernardino last fall, Democrats on Capitol Hill have seized on the watch-list issue as both an anti-terrorism policy and a politically savvy way to pressure Republicans to move on gun control. Legislation sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California would allow the attorney general to block sales of firearms or explosives to people as long as there is “a reasonable belief that such individual may use a firearm or explosive in connection with terrorism.”

“If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked.”
The bill failed on a party-line vote in December. Democrats said they would try to attach the measure as an amendment to an appropriations bill on the Senate floor later this month, hoping the Orlando attack will jostle a few more Republicans running for reelection this fall. Hillary Clinton reiterated her support for the effort during a speech in Cleveland on Monday. “If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked,” she said. “You shouldn’t be able to exploit loopholes and evade criminal background checks by buying online or at a gun show. And yes, if you’re too dangerous to get on a plane, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America.”
 
haymarket said:
You have gone over the edge ranting about things that make no sense in your zeal to attack me. Simply provide for me evidence that there is such a thing as a NATURAL RIGHT.
Click to expand...

https://www.nccs.net/natural-law-the-ultimate-source-of-constitutional-law.php

Read, educate, learn. I'm not attacking you. I'm pointing out your dishonesty in the matter of rights. You claim Constitution!!! Yet you deny that which MADE the Constitution. Ergo your position is counter to itself.

haymarket said:
You cannot. You will not. You have not. In fact, in 300 years, the idea of natural rights has never advanced beyond a mere theory of willful belief.
Click to expand...
The Constitution of the United States of America begs to differ with you. Only due to the perversion of progressive corruption have our natural rights eroded in favor of greedy politicians looking to use the Government to further their own careers and beliefs.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
If we had our way, Mateen would not have been able to legally purchase firearms. But thanks to the Republicans....
Click to expand...

Interesting that they mention San Bernardino. Those folks got their guns from a "friend".

These terror list restrictions are ridiculous because anybody that's actually tied to a terror group will have access to firearms through illicit means. If this guy in Orlando was prohibited from buying a gun because he was on the list what makes you think that his wife wouldn't have done it for him?

The terror list proposal is a violation of the 5th Amendment and generally useless on top of that.
 
Renae said:
https://www.nccs.net/natural-law-the-ultimate-source-of-constitutional-law.php

Read, educate, learn. I'm not attacking you. I'm pointing out your dishonesty in the matter of rights. You claim Constitution!!! Yet you deny that which MADE the Constitution. Ergo your position is counter to itself.
Click to expand...

Where did I deny who made our Constitution? It is ironic that on this past Sunday as the news of the Orlando massacre was being broadcast everywhere, I stood in Independence Hall in Philadelphia right in the very room where our Constitution was written. So I know very very well where it came from.

The Constitution of the United States of America begs to differ with you. Only due to the perversion of progressive corruption have our natural rights eroded in favor of greedy politicians looking to use the Government to further their own careers and beliefs
Click to expand...

Specifically WHERE does the Constitution differ with me and upon what contention of mine does it differ?
 
Lutherf said:
Interesting that they mention San Bernardino. Those folks got their guns from a "friend".

These terror list restrictions are ridiculous because anybody that's actually tied to a terror group will have access to firearms through illicit means. If this guy in Orlando was prohibited from buying a gun because he was on the list what makes you think that his wife wouldn't have done it for him?

The terror list proposal is a violation of the 5th Amendment and generally useless on top of that.
Click to expand...

Ah. It's the old "criminals will break laws anyway so why have laws in the first place" argument.

*sigh*
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Ah. It's the old "criminals will break laws anyway so why have laws in the first place" argument.

*sigh*
Click to expand...

Actually, it's the "A law like this is Unconstitutional and won't accomplish what you think it will" argument.
 
haymarket said:
Except that the issue of what constitutes CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS is something we wildly disagree about when it comes to guns. So the cheap shot you just took - that people who want gun control want "to remove one" - is simply not part of any serious discussion as it perverts and distorts what is really being considered.
Click to expand...

There's not much to disagree with. In order to disagree, you must first redefine 4 words. Shall, not, be, infringed.
 
"Homeland Security"

49 dead and 54 wounded is a 3 day weekend in Chicago and "Homeland Security is nowhere to be found. 10k a year due to day to day violence that has precisely zero to do with Background checks, Assault rifles, waiting periods, magazine capacity bans, gunshow loopholes or any of the other anti-gun ideological rhetoric. The head of DHS is nothing more than your garden variety anti-gun hack looking to exploit the occasional tragic incident to further an agenda.
 
haymarket said:
So you are unable to identify this group of WE other than you trying to enlarge and engrandize your own personal opinion by making yourself all puffed up and invoking the backing of the crowd.

Got it.
Click to expand...

It's more of a lack of wiliness to re-identify information for you. Apparently you have a memory issue, whether purposeful or not. I suspect the former.
 
haymarket said:
You allege that the Founders were INBRED. Provide documentation for that claim.
Click to expand...

I may have been mistaken on that. Guess everything I alleged in that post is under question then.
 
jimbo said:
There's not much to disagree with. In order to disagree, you must first redefine 4 words. Shall, not, be, infringed.
Click to expand...

So what does that mean to you?
 
American said:
It's more of a lack of wiliness to re-identify information for you. Apparently you have a memory issue, whether purposeful or not. I suspect the former.
Click to expand...

In your case you have proven your own inability to produce what you claim exists and no evidence offered of that claim.
 
American said:
I may have been mistaken on that. Guess everything I alleged in that post is under question then.
Click to expand...

Everything you claim is ALWAYS under question without evidence to prove your claims.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
If we had our way, Mateen would not have been able to legally purchase firearms. But thanks to the Republicans....

Since the ISIS-inspired mass shooting in San Bernardino last fall, Democrats on Capitol Hill have seized on the watch-list issue as both an anti-terrorism policy and a politically savvy way to pressure Republicans to move on gun control. Legislation sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California would allow the attorney general to block sales of firearms or explosives to people as long as there is “a reasonable belief that such individual may use a firearm or explosive in connection with terrorism.”

“If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked.”
The bill failed on a party-line vote in December. Democrats said they would try to attach the measure as an amendment to an appropriations bill on the Senate floor later this month, hoping the Orlando attack will jostle a few more Republicans running for reelection this fall. Hillary Clinton reiterated her support for the effort during a speech in Cleveland on Monday. “If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked,” she said. “You shouldn’t be able to exploit loopholes and evade criminal background checks by buying online or at a gun show. And yes, if you’re too dangerous to get on a plane, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America.”
Click to expand...

Does that legislation contain the due process of determining if someone's been incorrectly added to the list?
Does that legislation contain the due process of requesting that one's self be removed from the list?
Does that legislation contain the due process of properly informing someone if they've been added and why?
Does that legislation contain the due process of how someone is added?
Does that legislation contain Congressional review and oversight as to methods, processes and procedures?

Form what I've heard, none of these things is part of the legislation, and if so, then it's not complete legislation, is it? It's only part of what the solution needs to be, and should be voted down until it is truly complete legislation. IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom