Serious Gun Control Question

[Snaggletiger]

Howard Stern weighs in courtesy of foxynewsdot I am a gay twerker that has no balls!!!!  I also have no idea how to use the quote function to post stories, so I annoy the piss out of others.  I like male genatalia in and around my mouth.

Howard Stern gave his two cents on the gun control debate following the Orlando terrorist attack Sunday night.

"I'm so upset about Orlando and what went down," Stern said on his show Wednesday. "But I can't believe these people would come out afterward and their answer to Orlando is to take away guns from the public. It's f----ing mind-blowing to me."

Stern then went on to make an analogy comparing the public to sheep, the terrorists to wolves and the military and police to sheepdogs.

"Now, let’s say I walked up literally to a sheep herd, and they know that every night the wolves pick off a couple of them,” Stern said. “What if I went up to the sheep and I said, ‘You wanna have a shot at the wolves? I’m gonna give you a pistol. You can actually even the playing field with these wolves whose fangs are out — you could shoot them and save your family.'"

Stern said he's anti-violence and admits that he couldn't "hurt a fly" if confronted and labels himself as a sheep. But, he said, "there are such horrible monsters in our world."

"The wolves are always plotting. They’ll use boxcutters. They’ll use an airplane to fly it right into a building. They don’t need AR-15s."

The outspoken SiriusXm personality said he's not for "taking away people’s rights," adding he thinks "the answer doesn't lie in taking any kind of ability of the sheep to protect themselves from the wolves. I wish it was that simple."

[AUTailgatingRules]

If you are collecting a government check you should not be able to fly except in cases of family emergencies (funerals, etc.)

There should be one store where you have to shop for clothes and groceries.  And it won't carry Polo or Gucci or caviar or sushi.  It'll be Dollar Generalish.  No ice cream, either.

If you have one child and are on the government dole you should be prevented from having any more.

You should have to do some type of community service to collect your government check.  Cleaning roadways, washing cars, something. 

If you commit a crime -- any crime -- you no longer have the right to get government money.  You have to go to a work camp. If you commit a violent crime you have to be moved to an island somewhere. 

You can't buy guns if you're on the government dole either.  Or cars other than the cheapest ford or chevy made.  No foreign cars, no luxury cars, no SUVs. 

Elect me president.  I'll make life so tough on the government tit that people will actually look for jobs.  And when I abolish NAFTA, slash the minimum wage, close all the borders, and lower taxes on small businesses, there will BE jobs. 

Vote for Kaos!

While all true, I was talking about government employees should not get a check if they are on the no fly list

[RottenBottom]

OK let me try it this way.

Let's say we put Mateen on a no fly/terror watch list and therefore he can no longer buy a gun

now let's say Mateen walks into the Pulse with a couple pipe bombs and kills 50 people anyway.

I pose the question again...

WHY THEY HELL WAS HE ALLOWED TO STAY IN THE COUNTRY

Because these so called "lists" have no meaning.  Ted Fucking Kennedy was on the no fly list so should he have been deported? I see this just like the IRS.  It is the only organization in the legal system that you have to prove wrong.  That means they, the IRS, are always right.  Putting that into practice, the federal government could put any person it deems an enemy on that list.  Thus, leading to even more power going to the executive branch.  I can't believe people want to give up their liberties like they do in today's world.

[Townhallsavoy]

It could easily be ascertained that I have no assault shovel.  Nor have I applied for one. 

Deport the rest.

But it's not easily ascertained.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/nyregion/14watchlist.html?_r=0

“Meet Mikey Hicks,” said Najlah Feanny Hicks, introducing her 8-year-old son, a New Jersey Cub Scout and frequent traveler who has seldom boarded a plane without a hassle because he shares the name of a suspicious person. “It’s not a myth.”

Michael Winston Hicks’s mother initially sensed trouble when he was a baby and she could not get a seat for him on their flight to Florida at an airport kiosk; airline officials explained that his name “was on the list,” she recalled.

The first time he was patted down, at Newark Liberty International Airport, Mikey was 2. He cried.

After years of long delays and waits for supervisors at every airport ticket counter, this year’s vacation to the Bahamas badly shook up the family. Mikey was frisked on the way there, then more aggressively on the way home.

“Up your arms, down your arms, up your crotch — someone is patting your 8-year-old down like he’s a criminal,” Mrs. Hicks recounted. “A terrorist can blow his underwear up and they don’t catch him. But my 8-year-old can’t walk through security without being frisked.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/15/one-woman-s-case-proves-it-s-basically-impossible-to-get-off-the-no-fly-list.html

As the Senate debated a proposal this month that would have barred gun sales to people on the government’s terrorism watch lists, Republicans decried the lists as unfair, unreliable and un-American. “There’s no due process or any way to get your name removed from it in a timely fashion,” Sen. Marco Rubio told CNN. “This is not a list you can be certain of,” Jeb Bush said. Mike Huckabee asserted that some people end up on the no-fly list due to “suspicion, not necessarily even so much as probable cause.”

Rahinah Ibrahim, a Malaysian architect with a doctorate from Stanford, knows from personal experience that they have a compelling point. Ibrahim is the only person since the 9/11 attacks to file a court challenge that ultimately removed her name from the watch lists. It took her almost a decade to prevail in court and even that victory has proved pyrrhic for her. While a federal judge agreed that her inclusion on the no-fly list was groundless, she remains unable to obtain a visa that would allow her to visit the United States even to attend academic conferences. A close look at her case by ProPublica provides dramatic evidence of what was argued this month in Washington: It is indeed remarkably easy to get on the list and nearly impossible to get off.

[AUTailgatingRules]

Because these so called "lists" have no meaning.  Ted Fucking Kennedy was on the no fly list so should he have been deported? I see this just like the IRS.  It is the only organization in the legal system that you have to prove wrong.  That means they, the IRS, are always right.  Putting that into practice, the federal government could put any person it deems an enemy on that list.  Thus, leading to even more power going to the executive branch.  I can't believe people want to give up their liberties like they do in today's world.

Then Fix the fucking list and either deport or detain anyone deemed not trustworthy enough to fly or own a gun.  I'm sorry but if this is war against radical Islam, then you have to be willing to detain the enemy when you find them.

If some asshole goes on Facebook and swears allegiance to ISIS, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo.

If Some Asshole send money to ISIS, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo

If some asshole swears allegiance to Al Qaeda, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo. 

See how you handle these people.  They are at war with us, we need to wake up and realize it

[RottenBottom]

Then Fix the fucking list and either deport or detain anyone deemed not trustworthy enough to fly or own a gun.  I'm sorry but if this is war against radical Islam, then you have to be willing to detain the enemy when you find them.

If some asshole goes on Facebook and swears allegiance to ISIS, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo.

If Some Asshole send money to ISIS, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo

If some asshole swears allegiance to Al Qaeda, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo. 

See how you handle these people.  They are at war with us, we need to wake up and realize it

The guy was investigated twice by the FBI. Not only did Disney report him to the FBI but a local gun shop did also.  If this wasn't enough to warrant the FBI believing he was a terrorist, then why the hell would he be on that list you speak of? The head of the FBI is Obama; therefore, he is responsible for why Meteen was in the country.  The thing that pisses me off about this is that the left claims to be champions of the LGBT community  but supports a religion such as Islam.

[AUChizad]

Then Fix the fucking list and either deport or detain anyone deemed not trustworthy enough to fly or own a gun.  I'm sorry but if this is war against radical Islam, then you have to be willing to detain the enemy when you find them.

If some asshole goes on Facebook and swears allegiance to ISIS, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo.

If Some Asshole send money to ISIS, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo

If some asshole swears allegiance to Al Qaeda, then detain his ass and send him to Guantanamo. 

See how you handle these people.  They are at war with us, we need to wake up and realize it

You're starting to understand why we don't need the fucking list.

[AUTailgatingRules]

You're starting to understand why we don't need the fucking list.

Nor Gun Control

[dallaswareagle]

Because these so called "lists" have no meaning.  Ted Fucking Kennedy was on the no fly list so should he have been deported? I see this just like the IRS.  It is the only organization in the legal system that you have to prove wrong.  That means they, the IRS, are always right.  Putting that into practice, the federal government could put any person it deems an enemy on that list.  Thus, leading to even more power going to the executive branch.  I can't believe people want to give up their liberties like they do in today's world.

Based on his history, passengers don't do so well when traveling with him.

[Snaggletiger]

Based on his history, passengers don't do so well when traveling with him.

You know, I wanted the mods to take away your "Like" button, and then you go and post a thing like that and make me use it.  I hate you.

[Saniflush]

Based on his history, passengers don't do so well when traveling with him.

I don't want to like your post cause it's yours but I have no choice in this instance.

[WiregrassTiger]

Based on his history, passengers don't do so well when traveling with him.

^^^This is great! Who typed it for you?

[CCTAU]

Some here seem to be OK with this person controlling the list:


Hillary Clinton:  “White Terrorism” and Police Are as Big a Threat as ISIS   

http://dailyheadlines.net/archives/37027

[AUChizad]

Nor Gun Control

Yep.

[WiregrassTiger]

Yep.

Well, as Kaos pointed out, you need it. But not anybody else. Carry on.

[AUChizad]

Some here seem to be OK with this person controlling the list:


Hillary Clinton:  “White Terrorism” and Police Are as Big a Threat as ISIS   

http://dailyheadlines.net/archives/37027

Dailyheadlines.net's fact-free horshit blog not withstanding...

Hi. I'm the one who said from the beginning I'm not ok with EITHER of those assholes.

http://reason.com/blog/2016/06/15/no-fly-list-no-guns-trump-agrees-with-ob

No-Fly List, No Guns: Trump Agrees with Obama, Clinton. He Thinks the NRA Should, Too.

Robby Soave|Jun. 15, 2016 12:48 pm

Donald Trump is not a man of ideological principles, conservative or otherwise. He's a reflexive authoritarian who thinks the answer to virtually every problem is more government involvement, at least and especially if "winners" like himself are in charge. Case in point: Trump is backing a gun control measure fervently supported by Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration.

And he wants the NRA to do the same.

Earlier today, Trump tweeted:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
I will be meeting with the NRA, who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no fly list, to buy guns.

A spokesperson for the NRA replied that the organization is happy to meet with Trump, though the NRA will remain opposed to using the no-fly list, or terror watch list, to deny constitutional rights to American citizens.

On this issue—the issue of whether people should lose their rights because the government merely suspects them of doing something wrong—the NRA shows more respect for civil liberties than most Democrats. Denying guns to people on the no-fly list is an obvious violation of due process that, if allowed to stand, could easily imperil other rights. As Mark Joseph Stern writes at Slate:

If the government can revoke your right to access firearms simply because it has decided to place you on a secret, notoriously inaccurate list, it could presumably restrict your other rights in a similar manner. You could be forbidden from advocating for causes you believe in, or associating with like-minded activists; your right against intrusive, unreasonable searches could be suspended. And you would have no recourse: The government could simply declare that, as a name on a covert list, you are owed no due process at all.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton are wrong to think that arbitrary lists are a valid and legal means of stripping Americans of their gun rights. It would be nice if the Republican Party had chosen as its standard-bearer someone who could articulate the conservative case for the Second Amendment and due process. Instead, it chose Trump. Now gun rights will be in jeopardy, no matter which of the two charlatans currently seeking the presidency prevails.

That's your guy. A Democrat in sheep's clothing.

By the way, there's one guy on your ballot who DOESN'T support stripping people of their 2nd amendment rights based on some arbitrary bullshit government list.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/15/gary-johnson-comes-out-against-no-fly-no-gun-proposal/

[Snaggletiger]

To be fair, I think that's pretty much in line with Trump's stance on immigration and Muslims in general.  He wants a moratorium on allowing Muslims in the country until, as he says it, we get a handle on the terrorism issue.  I think it stands to reason that he'd be all for a gun ban for anyone on this type of watch list.  Now granted, as has been pointed out by several on here, it's the actual watch list that comes into question and who can wind up on it.  If I knew the watch list was legit and there was actual evidence to support someone being on there, I'd be behind the ban, whether it was made at the suggestion of Trump or Obama, Hitlary or whoever.

[The Six]

[CCTAU]

To be fair, I think that's pretty much in line with Trump's stance on immigration and Muslims in general.  He wants a moratorium on allowing Muslims in the country until, as he says it, we get a handle on the terrorism issue.  I think it stands to reason that he'd be all for a gun ban for anyone on this type of watch list.  Now granted, as has been pointed out by several on here, it's the actual watch list that comes into question and who can wind up on it.  If I knew the watch list was legit and there was actual evidence to support someone being on there, I'd be behind the ban, whether it was made at the suggestion of Trump or Obama, Hitlary or whoever.

And to be fair, Trump said he would talk to the NRA. He did not say screw you, I'll be issuing an executive order!

[AUChizad]

Just like his stance on how women who have abortions "should be punished", Trump is trying to imitate what he imagines a conservative position to be without understanding them.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/19/nra-says-trumps-orlando-comments-defy-common-sense/

NRA says Trump’s Orlando comments ‘defy common sense’
By Marisa Schultz June 19, 2016 | 3:00pm

Donald Trump’s suggestion that armed clubgoers could have prevented the worst mass shooting in modern US history “defies common sense,” according to the National Rifle Association — which is backing the tycoon for president but on Sunday had two of its top officials taking rare exception with him.

“No one thinks that people should go into a nightclub drinking and carrying firearms,” Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, told ABC’s “This Week.” “That defies common sense. It also defies the law.”

Trump had fired up a Texas rally Friday by saying that if people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando “had guns strapped . . . right to their waist or right to their ankle,” it would have been a “beautiful sight” to see them shoot “the son of a bitch.”

Cox’s remarks Sunday echoed those of President Obama, who said last Thursday in Orlando that the notion that armed clubgoers could have averted the tragedy “defies common sense.”
NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre said Sunday that pistol-packing revelers are not a good idea.

“I don’t think you should have firearms where people are drinking,” LaPierre told CBS’s “Face the Nation.” He later tweeted, “I want to clarify my comment: if you’re going to carry, don’t drink. OK to carry in restaurants that serve alcohol.”

The NRA endorsed Trump in May, and the mogul has run on a platform of protecting gun owners and the Second Amendment and arming the law-abiding citizens to stop bad guys.

After Omar Mateen slaughtered 49 people at Pulse, Trump announced that he wanted to meet with the NRA. He urged the powerful gun lobby to agree to banning people on terrorism watch lists from buying guns.

“We have to make sure that people that are terrorists or have even an inclination toward terrorism cannot buy weapons, guns,” he told “This Week.”

But LaPierre said such a ban would have had no effect in Orlando, since Mateen’s name had been removed from the list.

“NRA didn’t take the guy’s name off the list. The federal government did, FBI did, largely because of . . . some politically correct policies that I think I have been talking about earlier,” he told “Face the Nation.”

Cox, who said the group has “conversations” with Trump often and confirmed a planned meeting, danced around whether the NRA and the mogul saw eye-to-eye on a watch-list ban, saying the FBI should investigate anyone on its radar who tries to buy a gun.

“If there’s a reason to believe in probable cause that they’re engaged in terrorist activity, they ought to not only be prevented from getting a firearm, they ought to be arrested,” Cox said.

“We want to make sure the terrorists don’t have access to firearms. We also want to make sure that law-abiding Americans have the common-sense ability to protect themselves when the government is failing.”

The Senate will vote on a series of gun-control measures Monday.

The NRA has given its blessing to a proposal by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) that would allow authorities to block gun sales to a person on the terror watch list if they can show probable cause within three days. The Justice Department backs legislation by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) calling for an outright ban on sales to suspected terrorists.