Senate Filabuster-Terrorists and Guns
#1
There is a fillabuster going on right now on the Senate floor. The filabuster is to prevent terrorists from obtaining guns. Personally, I want to say that I don't think there is much that can be done that will keep dangerous people from obtaining guns, but it will become illegal for people on the no fly list and other suspected terrorists from buying guns directly if the Democrats have their way. What do you all think?
Reply
#2
(06-15-2016, 08:40 PM)cletus1 Wrote: There is a fillabuster going on right now on the Senate floor. The filabuster is to prevent terrorists from obtaining guns. Personally, I want to say that I don't think there is much that can be done that will keep dangerous people from obtaining guns, but it will become illegal for people on the no fly list and other suspected terrorists from buying guns directly if the Democrats have their way. What do you all think?

In all honesty, I doubt it will matter much... if bad guys want guns, they'll figure out a way to get them.

Edited to add: But, I would support it.
Reply
#3
(06-15-2016, 08:45 PM)Scrapper Wrote:
(06-15-2016, 08:40 PM)cletus1 Wrote: There is a fillabuster going on right now on the Senate floor. The filabuster is to prevent terrorists from obtaining guns. Personally, I want to say that I don't think there is much that can be done that will keep dangerous people from obtaining guns, but it will become illegal for people on the no fly list and other suspected terrorists from buying guns directly if the Democrats have their way. What do you all think?

In all honesty, I doubt it will matter much... if bad guys want guns, they'll figure out a way to get them.

Edited to add: But, I would support it.

That is exactly what I think. However, if it's illegal to sell guns to suspected terrorists and illegal for those people to possess them, then those guns can be confiscated and those people not allowed to have them can be charged with a crime. It sure can't hurt to have a vote on it that I can see.
Reply
#4
Anyone can be put on that list for no reason without due process. It is relieving you of one more of your liberties, but you guys don't really care about that. The Orlando shooter was on the fbi radar but was mysteriously dropped, so what good is a secret list that you can't call anyone to find out how you got on there or how to get off there? The obozo administration thinks nothing of violating our rights, but when it comers to moslems he worries those lists might be violating their civil rights. Besides, kkkillary takes large amounts of money from terrorist supporting nations and she isn't on it. Should she be on it?
Reply
#5
(06-15-2016, 10:53 PM)orygunluvr Wrote: Anyone can be put on that list for no reason without due process. It is relieving you of one more of your liberties, but you guys don't really care about that. The Orlando shooter was on the fbi radar but was mysteriously dropped, so what good is a secret list that you can't call anyone to find out how you got on there or how to get off there? The obozo administration thinks nothing of violating our rights, but when it comers to moslems he worries those lists might be violating their civil rights. Besides, kkkillary takes large amounts of money from terrorist supporting nations and she isn't on it. Should she be on it?

You heard Trump is going to meet with the NRA about keeping suspected terrorists from getting guns right?
Reply
#6
Senate filibuster ends after Republicans agree to hold vote on gun control measures


By VICE News and Reuters
June 16, 2016 | 4:50 am


Senate Democrats have ended the nearly 15-hour long filibuster they instigated in an attempt to push for action on gun control reform, with Democratic Senator Chris Murphy saying Republicans have agreed to hold votes on measures to expand background checks and prevent people on US terrorism watch lists from buying guns.

Democrats stalled Senate proceedings on Wednesday in a bid to push for tougher gun control legislation and had planned to speak on the Senate floor through out the night. The filibuster came to a close early Thursday morning.


"We still have to get from here to there, but we did not have that commitment when we started," Washington Post reported, quoting Murphy.


Democrats are specifically pushing for a vote on two amendments on a spending bill currently under debate. The proposed measures would require universal background checks and prevent people on the terrorist watch list from purchasing guns altogether.


Speaking on the senate floor during the filibuster, Murphy said lawmakers should "not proceed with debate on amendments to this bill until we have figured out a way to come together on, at the very least, two simple ideas."


Murphy's attempt to pressure Republicans comes just days after a gunman shot and killed 49 people in Orlando with an assault rifle. The attacker had previously been under investigation by the FBI for links to terrorism but was still able to obtain the firearm legally.


Legislation barring those who are being investigated for terrorism from buying guns was introduced last year by Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein, but failed to go anywhere due to lack of support from Republicans. Republican Senator John Cornyn introduced a compromise measure that would leave it up to a judge to decide if an individual on the terrorist watch list would be able to purchase a gun, but so far the two parties have yet to come together on a unified approach.


Murphy became one of Capitol Hill's most vocal proponents for gun control after 20 children and six adults were gunned down in the mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012. Murphy represented the district that included Newtown when he was in the House of Representatives.


Senate Democrats were not the only ones loudly protesting Republicans' refusal to pass gun control legislation this week. During a legislative session in the House of Representatives on Monday, Speaker Paul Ryan called for a moment of silence for the victims of the Orlando shooting, which House Democrats responded to with angry shouts of criticism. Some Democrats walked out of the chamber altogether to protest Ryan's refusal to hear legislation aimed at restricting the sale and purchase of firearms.

Reply
#7
(06-16-2016, 06:31 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-15-2016, 10:53 PM)orygunluvr Wrote: Anyone can be put on that list for no reason without due process. It is relieving you of one more of your liberties, but you guys don't really care about that. The Orlando shooter was on the fbi radar but was mysteriously dropped, so what good is a secret list that you can't call anyone to find out how you got on there or how to get off there? The obozo administration thinks nothing of violating our rights, but when it comers to moslems he worries those lists might be violating their civil rights. Besides, kkkillary takes large amounts of money from terrorist supporting nations and she isn't on it. Should she be on it?

You heard Trump is going to meet with the NRA about keeping suspected terrorists from getting guns right?


Trump will get educated on everyones rights at that meeting, the NRA has already said as much. One way to prevent terrorists from getting weapons legally is to NOT remove them and their mosques from  the lists. You must think this is a great country where it's citizens are expected to give up their rights but then we are supposed to worry about immigrants. legal or not, and their rights. So now you must be a fan of the patriot act as well.
Reply
#8
Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.
Reply
#9
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?
Reply
#10
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.
Reply
#11
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?
The rest of the world is being attacked by moslems WITH guns and knives, but they lack any form of viable self defense. Why would you want to take that away from any honest citizen? You do realize that government officials have been put on those lists for no apparent reason, right?
Reply
#12
(06-16-2016, 08:43 AM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?
The rest of the world is being attacked by moslems WITH guns and knives, but they lack any form of viable self defense. Why would you want to take that away from any honest citizen? You do realize that government officials have been put on those lists for no apparent reason, right?
You keep arguing against a position I have not taken. I think Americans will keep their guns and I am all for it. You seem to be arguing that even suspected terrorists should be able to legally buy guns. These terrorists are mostly extremist Muslims, right? Well?
Reply
#13
(06-16-2016, 08:01 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.
It has gone nowhere since Brady got shot. 

I just flashed on an image of a terrorist dressed like an Arab going into a gun store and walking out with 2 assault rifles. God I wish I could draw.
Reply
#14
(06-16-2016, 08:01 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.

Define?
Reply
#15
(06-16-2016, 09:29 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 08:01 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.

Define?

Oh I dunno, Maybe the fucking Brady Bill for starters....

So, this conversation is really going to turn into people supporting the idea that gun control has NOT been discussed at length over the past 30 years?  I am not talking specifically legislative action, the original comment from Clete was "finally begin to have a conversation" And i'm saying it has been conversed to death.

Define.....
give me a fucking break
Reply
#16
(06-16-2016, 09:17 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 08:43 AM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?
The rest of the world is being attacked by moslems WITH guns and knives, but they lack any form of viable self defense. Why would you want to take that away from any honest citizen? You do realize that government officials have been put on those lists for no apparent reason, right?
You keep arguing against a position I have not taken. I think Americans will keep their guns and I am all for it. You seem to be arguing that even suspected terrorists should be able to legally buy guns. These terrorists are mostly extremist Muslims, right? Well?

Ted Kennedy, like our Orlando shooter, was a registered demokkkratikkk and also on the no fly list. Difference being the Orlando shooter got his named removed by the policies of obozo, Ted had to get his off of a watch list himself, and wasn't investigated TWICE by the FBI before having his name and terrorist ties scrubbed.
Reply
#17
(06-16-2016, 09:54 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 09:29 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 08:01 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.

Define?

Oh I dunno, Maybe the fucking Brady Bill for starters....

So, this conversation is really going to turn into people supporting the idea that gun control has NOT been discussed at length over the past 30 years?  I am not talking specifically legislative action, the original comment from Clete was "finally begin to have a conversation" And i'm saying it has been conversed to death.

Define.....
give me a fucking break

DEFINE the red highlighted, directed at Cletus?

Give me a fucking break....
Reply
#18
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Define?

(Gee, GPNative, sorry I quoted a post with your fucking name it)
Reply
#19
(06-16-2016, 10:11 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 09:54 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 09:29 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 08:01 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote: I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.

Define?

Oh I dunno, Maybe the fucking Brady Bill for starters....

So, this conversation is really going to turn into people supporting the idea that gun control has NOT been discussed at length over the past 30 years?  I am not talking specifically legislative action, the original comment from Clete was "finally begin to have a conversation" And i'm saying it has been conversed to death.

Define.....
give me a fucking break

DEFINE the red highlighted, directed at Cletus?

Give me a fucking break....

Ok, I'll eat crow on that one....I did not see the red highlight, I just saw my post quoted and thought it was directed my way....

I redact my statement directed at you.
But in fairness....it would of stood out more if you had just quoted from clete's original post.
Reply
#20
(06-16-2016, 09:29 AM)Hugo Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 08:01 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:20 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(06-16-2016, 07:02 AM)GPnative Wrote: Orlando still would of happened even if these new amendments were already in place. Might as well call the amendments the "warm and fuzzy" because that is all it will bring, a false sense of security with warm and fuzzy feelings.

I said from the beginning that I doubted any new restrictions or checks would prevent a motivated terrorist. There are millions of guns in this country. Anyone that wants one can get one legally or illegally. 

The idea behind the vote IMO, is to finally begin a discussion on what might be done to prevent at least some of the nut cases from getting guns, especially military style assault rifles. You know the rest of the world thinks we are crazy for doing nothing, right?

Begin a discussion? This has been discussed since Brady took a bullet.

Define?
I have played that game with you way too many times before. So, I will say it is less about looks and more about firepower and leave it at that.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)