Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Oh, right. You can't. Just more hot air.
STRANGER TROLLING BINGO!
Today's winning picks are:
Gun nuts!
Thee Olde Seconde Amendmente!
Suicide!
Assault weapons!
Apples and oranges!
You just do not care about X dead Y's!
Tautological tautologies!
Picking cherries!
I don't want to ban all guns but ... !
The NRA!
Beat a straw man for big bonus points!
Yes, the NRA doesn't support arming felons.
YOU JUST DON'T KNOW YET.
This is a criminal issue, not a gun issue people. Get it right.
Guess who heavily supported that legislation?
No the NRA hasn't publicly supported giving guns to felons, they've just actively prevented all efforts of checking to see if someone's a felon before they buy a gun.
Your move, gun nuts.
"... they've just actively prevented all efforts of checking to see if someone's a felon before they buy a gun."
No, they have not.
All FFL's still have to run a background check.
Therefore, not "all efforts".
In Washington state, many of the gun shows require that you be a member which includes a background check.
Again, not "all efforts".
And, finally, no one is required to sell a gun to anyone.
So there are over 100 million guns that owned by law-abiding citizens in America.
And less than 1% of the guns owned will ever be used in any crime.
So the system seems to be working on the whole.
Which begs the question of why put more requirements on the 99%+ who do follow the laws instead of focusing on the less than 1% who break the laws?
And then deflect, deflect, deflect. Is it still all about helping the mentally ill (like it was violent video games or putting armed guards in every school before) or do you have a new tactic now?
Or are you just taking punditry creative license to have a "tee-hee" moment, Chicago Fan?
So, in some way I suppose you're right. Background checks aren't helping because they only apply to registered dealers. It's sort of like if you went to a liquor store and they wouldn't sell to you because you were under 21. No problem though because there's someone standing out in front of the store selling booze and they don't card. Thanks to the NRA those people will never have to card and we can't do anything about it. Thanks NRA.
"There was a recent article they linked to that showed somewhere around 5,000 background checks were denied last year in Washington alone."
No there was not.
There was a recent article where some assumptions were made and then extrapolated to ESTIMATE that 5,000 or more background checks were failed in Washington.
"Of course, after they were told they couldn't buy at a gun dealer I'm sure many of those people just went to the private marketplace that the NRA is making sure can't be regulated in any way."
And there is another assumption.
Meanwhile, the real questions are:
a. Are there really that many legitimate failures?
b. What is the "false positive" rate on those failures? Someone "failed" who should have "passed".
c. Where are the prosecutions of those that really were criminals trying to buy guns?
"Thanks to the NRA those people will never have to card and we can't do anything about it."
And, again, you're making an awful lot of assumptions there without any facts.
Where are the prosecutions?
After all, if we don't live in Fear, how can we cower beneath our white bedsheets?
"if we don't live in Fear, how can we cower beneath our white bedsheets? "
A Slog gun debate
When no one plays the race card
Lacks liberalism
Let's watch him now try to figure out why there are background checks at all, if they don't work. Pop! Here he comes!
"Lacks liberalism"
I think it is more just mental laziness.
If someone has a different opinion than you, that person is a bigot.
So what if that person voted for Obama. A different opinion means they're a bigot.
Voted twice for Obama? A different opinion means they're a bigot!
Voted twice for Obama and voted for gay marriage? Bigot, bigot, bigot, bigot go get your white sheet you bigot.
Beat a straw man for big bonus points!
It's easier to make claims about someone else's character than it is to address the points they've actually made.
"Also, 'I voted for Obama. Twice.' is the new 'I have black friends.'"
Thanks for providing the support my point.
"Bigot" now means "someone with a different opinion".
"The case in question involves the Aryan Brotherhood."
Maybe it does.
Yet that has nothing to do with the beliefs of other people who support the 2nd Amendment.
Fixed that for you.
"What? No one has accused anyone of being a bigot based on their opinion of the 2nd amendment."
Read #28 and #29.
That's two.
Hypocrits.
They are wholly owned subsidiary of gun manufacturing corporations. Corporations that realized in 1970 that there was no enough profit in making small arms for government military sales. So they started a three decade long PR campaign to convince gun owners they had a right - no - a NEEED - to own dozens of guns including military "style" guns. And they convinced elected officials to facilitate laws to that end. Mostly through racist fear mongering.
Before that time nobody wanted to own an AR-15. In fact it was widely thought in hunting communities (that WAS gun owners pre-1975) that you were a nut or huge pussy if you wanted a machine gun or carted around a pistol.
Any propaganda the NRA utilizes to successfully convince gun owners (or gun control advocates) that the aim of the NRA is supporting gun ownership "rights" is merely icing on the cake to serve that singular end - PROFIT FOR GUN MAKERS AND SELLERS.
Cause and effect doesn't exist to these people who attempt to label anyone who disagrees a "nut" and a "fanatic"
I AM SCARED LETS MAKE A LAW TO JUST IN CASE -
Said the people that believe gay marriage will lead to HIV outbreaks.
IF WE SAVE ONE CHILD ITS WORTH IT -
Said the pro life demonstrator blocking the clinic.
Of course, guns kill, too. But if you are sincere in your fanatical fantasies about saving humanity, you can always work on getting rid of abortion -- but you won't, and you don't.
You probably don't even care about the 300,000+ people who die, painfully and financially destuctively, of cancer every year in the US. You do know about that, don't you?
You watch too much socially engineered media, you get caught up in it all, and you buy off on what is spoonfed to you. And you forget prioroties because when it comes to fabricated consensus opinion -- by golly, you certainly don't want to feel left out, do you? By golly, that's a fate worse than death, isn't it?
Got to save the gays, the environment. Got to destroy the gun rights. What other central banker agenda item did you intend to support?
You worry about white supremacists and the NRA, yet you are a hypocrit because you have no clue how central banker money is creating all the platforms that you are socially engineered to support.
i know plenty about the cancer deaths. billions are raised each year to research cures. the same cannot be said for research into preventing the firearm carnage unequalled in the DEVELOPED world. the money's all spent on maintaining the status quo.
newtown IS the status quo.
you and your fellow members need a reverse Cincinnati revolt.