Current Affairs The " another shooting in America " thread
- Status
I don't get why they're so against expanding background checks, especially when you can appeal being denied a gun
Madness, genuine madness
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
$$$$$$
It's election season. If you vote against the wishes of the NRA, they'll run/finance someone in your district who'll outspend and beat you. The Republicans on the hill are selfish cowards.
But there's LOADS of people in America, who will easily pass the background check and will spend millions on guns just like they always do
This will just ensure the odd nutter doesn't slip through the net
But why don't the NRA like it?
This will effect probably 0.5% of their membership
Pretty much every single one of them would pass this check
This is just to ensure insane people can't get a gun
The NRA might be a group I wouldn't want to hang with, but I think most of them are level headed enough to pass these checks
The NRA are bankrolled by the arms industry. They used to exist for hunting info and gun training etc, however they now solely exist to maintain profits for gun manufacturers.
They do this through fear. Fear that your rights are being impeded, fear that the president is coming to take your guns. It's a game of chicken where they can't be seen to blink. If they concede ground on this, then it will be bans on assault weapons and that will effect profits.
Basically, they've taken such a hardline constitutional stance on the second amendment that if they cave to any compromise, they are negating their own fear filled propaganda.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...5f8286-3792-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html
The mayor of the District of Columbia argued last week that assault rifles are “only meant to devastate humans,” and that following the massacre in Orlando, Congress must “finally do something” about guns. However, it’s safe to say that this is not what Mayor Muriel E. Bowser, a Democrat, had in mind:
As the Senate voted down several gun-control measuresMonday evening, House Republicans introduced measures that would effectively wipe out existing gun-control laws in the District, which are among the country’s most restrictive Under one measure, introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the District would be prohibited from spending money to enforce laws regarding which residents and visitors can carry firearms.
Another, authored by Rep. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), would prevent D.C. from limiting concealed-carry permits to those with a “good reason” to do so.
And a third, also by Massie, would keep the District from enforcing its gun-free zones, such as those around D.C. public schools and government buildings, where firearms are now prohibited. Maisse who has attempted to roll back D.C. gun laws before, said in a statement emailed to reporters Monday evening that his proposals are aimed at using Congress’s ultimate authority over the District to let residents and visitors to the nation’s capital arm themselves in hopes of preventing an Orlando-style attack.
“Gun control is not the solution. The only practical way to have prevented this tragedy is by eliminating gun-free zones where security is inadequate to protect law-abiding citizens who are otherwise capable, willing and endowed (by their Creator with the right) to defend themselves,” Massie wrote. “I introduced these amendments to reduce the likelihood of a similar tragedy in DC.”
The mayor of the District of Columbia argued last week that assault rifles are “only meant to devastate humans,” and that following the massacre in Orlando, Congress must “finally do something” about guns. However, it’s safe to say that this is not what Mayor Muriel E. Bowser, a Democrat, had in mind:
As the Senate voted down several gun-control measuresMonday evening, House Republicans introduced measures that would effectively wipe out existing gun-control laws in the District, which are among the country’s most restrictive Under one measure, introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the District would be prohibited from spending money to enforce laws regarding which residents and visitors can carry firearms.
Another, authored by Rep. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), would prevent D.C. from limiting concealed-carry permits to those with a “good reason” to do so.
And a third, also by Massie, would keep the District from enforcing its gun-free zones, such as those around D.C. public schools and government buildings, where firearms are now prohibited. Maisse who has attempted to roll back D.C. gun laws before, said in a statement emailed to reporters Monday evening that his proposals are aimed at using Congress’s ultimate authority over the District to let residents and visitors to the nation’s capital arm themselves in hopes of preventing an Orlando-style attack.
“Gun control is not the solution. The only practical way to have prevented this tragedy is by eliminating gun-free zones where security is inadequate to protect law-abiding citizens who are otherwise capable, willing and endowed (by their Creator with the right) to defend themselves,” Massie wrote. “I introduced these amendments to reduce the likelihood of a similar tragedy in DC.”
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
Worse mate, it's evil
I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and only call them idiots.
Slippery Slope, mate. Everyone with a terribly-reasoned argument dreads the slippery slope.
jal123
Player Valuation: £40m
If only the Sheriffs deputy was armed, he could've stopped this.
Im sure the gunman was just protecting his home.
I heard he was wearing a T-shirt.... as was his right to bare arms
- Status