GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

originally posted by: queenofswords
They need to be identified and dealt with on that level.

Others will have to be dealt with on a domestic criminal basis.

Hmmm.. what you typed actually lost something in the translation.
Here you go. Its better in the original german form-

Sie müssen identifiziert und behandelt auf dieser Ebene. Andere behandelt werden muss auf einem inländischen strafrechtliche Grundlage.

So for identification what are you thinking? A yellow, err green patch with a star of dav... err crescent moon?

In WWII we didn't have to remind the Italians or Germans that our issue was not with the people.


How much better is the bible over the Quran?


What happens when one person says no..


These people do not represent Islam any more than the kkk represents Christianity. We live in a free and open society based on laws and that is the price we pay to ensure another Reich doesn't gain a foothold. The only way to beat terrorism of this kind is to continue accepting more than one idea.

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
- Ben Franklin

Islam says -
Suicide is not permissible.
Killing innocent people is not permissible.
Conversion to Islam must be a free choice and can't be compelled.

Jihad actually means struggle and not holy war.

When we give in and lock down segments of society terrorism has won. We outnumber the terrorists and nothing will change that. Terrorism has a 100% failure rate as it tends to galvanize the people its against.

I gladly accept the perils of a free and open society as opposed to seeing this sign -

Arbeit Macht Frei.

As a reminder -

I do not choose to be a common man.
It is my right to be uncommon … if I can.
I seek opportunity … not security.
I do not wish to be a kept citizen,
Humbled and dulled by having the State look after me.
I want to take the calculated risk,
To dream and to build. To fail and to succeed.
I refuse to barter incentive for a dole;
I prefer the challenges of life to the guaranteed existence;
The thrill of fulfillment to the stale calm of Utopia.
I will not trade freedom for beneficence
Nor my dignity for a handout
I will never cower before any master
Nor bend to any threat.
It is my heritage to stand erect, proud and unafraid;
To think and act for myself,
To enjoy the benefit of my creations
And to face the world boldly and say:
This, with God’s help, I have done.
All this is what it means to be an American.

- Thomas Paine (part in bold added by me).

^ Apparently it is Dean Aflange not Thomas Paine. But it sounds like something Paine would have said.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You misunderstand what I am saying. Maybe I should clarify something so you won't think I am suggesting we mark all muslims and round them up for interrogation. That would be ridiculous and unacceptable.


I am not saying a religion is our enemy. I am saying a faction in that religion is the stated enemy and we need to identify them.

You took the word "identify" and tried to literalize it by making it seem I wanted to mark them in some way. I hate it when people do such dishonest things by taking something out of the full context and honing in on that ONE piece they can distort. Shame on you.

By "identify" I mean our FBI and other government agencies authorized to investigate such things. Criminal investigators use undercover techniques, informants, and all manner of other ways to identify criminal activity. They should begin to do the same when dealing with radical islamists, because these are not just criminals they are "soldiers" of war. Target them, know who they are, and use whatever means at law enforcement's disposal to keep an eye on them.

Get a grip on the illegal immigrant problem, the open border fiasco, the inadequacies and outright ineptness in the vetting process that allows people into our country such as Tashfeen the Terror Lady, look at WHO is actually working in Homeland Security and TSA, stop being so stupid and get smart about today's world where a "soldier" no longer has to wear a uniform and invade us with tanks and parachutes.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
^ Apparently it is Dean Aflange not Thomas Paine. But it sounds like something Paine would have said.

Hmmm ok.. When I researched it it kept coming back as Thomas Paine. Thanks for the correction.

a reply to: queenofswords

Next time place your post into context before you hit the reply button.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: ~Lucidity

It doesnt answer the question..

Rosie Odonnell is anti gun except when it comes to her security detail. Most democrats are the same way.. They are pro gun when it comes to themselves and very anti gun when it comes to anyone else.

I'm pro-choice

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: queenofswords

Next time place your post into context before you hit the reply button.

Or maybe you could learn that reading comprehension is important and that there are various meanings to words. But, when you are so eager to preach your propaganda to others, you don't stop to THINK. That is a big problem in a lot of circles today....people knee-jerk based on how they WANT to react based on feelings rather than take a breath, read the material in context, and use rational THINKING skills to evaluate the message. Sheesh! A whole damn page of sermon and cut 'n paste rhetoric ensued because of it.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
It will not happen. Republicans own both houses of the legislature and the SCOTUS has ruled that the executive cannot make new laws via executive orders. Moreover the American public is vehemently opposed to it. any politician advocating it that wants to be elected (Shrillary for example) or reelected will crawfish on it fast enough to make a sonic boom. They are poll driven creatures and the polls are already coming in on the too quick gun grabbing hystrionics.

Again. Your solution?

a reply to: Echo007

And yours?

I'll give you a solution...but I'll explain it first. You see, some people think it makes sense to put band-aid on your cut every time you walk by that one door with the rusty sliver sticking out. I tend to look at a problem as a symptom of a larger problem, and I follow that problem back until I can't follow it further. In this example...yes, bandage your wound and then fix the door. That way you won't get cut again by that door.

The problem here with guns isn't solved by keeping bad people from getting them, it is solved by taking care of the bad people BEFORE they can get a gun. In this case...don't allow ISIS, who have infiltrated Syrian refugees, to enter our country by refusing the refugees. Don't allow terrorists to come across the border by fencing and actually stopping illegals from entering. Go into Mosques and check to assure they aren't preaching extremism...etc.

Stop the problem at the source. Don't allow terrorists entry into the USA and in fact...don't even allow the chance of it. By doing so, you keep them from getting guns and doing harm. You also stop them from getting knives, blowing up buildings, flying planes into buildings, etc.

Here is a fact. If no Muslims or illegals were allowed entry into the USA, the World Trade Center would be standing, this recent event wouldn't have happened, that innocent woman in California wouldn't have been shot and killed and God knows how many other events wouldn't have happened. If we removed all Muslims from the USA today, there would be no Islamic Terrorism in the USA. Simple logic...not that I'm suggesting it.

But you asked for a solution.

One more time just so this is clear...if there were no Muslims here, there wouldn't be any terrorism here. With the exception of Tim McVeigh I guess.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

If there were no men here, we wouldn't have any more rapes. Mass shootings would go down radically, as would serial killings.

Sounds like a plan.

a reply to: kaylaluv

If it were men that don't belong here or that came here illegally...I'd back you up on that. These are people that have no need to be here at all. The terrorists we fight are Muslim. That is a fact as is the truth that if they weren't here...9/11 would never have happened. I could also say if it wasn't for men 9/11 wouldn't have happened but the men here are American citizens with no reason to destroy our country.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

James Holmes belonged here and was here legally. Dylan Roof as well as Adam Lanza. Are you trying to tell me that all the rapes that happened in America were perpetrated by illegals and immigrants? Some may have been, but the common thread here is they were all MEN. Get rid of men, you get rid of the problem. Get me?

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Makes sense but for one point. People can come to visit, some on visas of varying type, some not. And some stay. Those are the people the no-fly list is looking for...to prevent them from flying in. If there is no such list our borders, as you put it, are more or less wide open. One less check.

a reply to: kaylaluv

I understand your point...but it isn't quite comparable. All Americans have been threatened by Muslims. Muslims threaten to kill and have killed Americans. Americans can keep from harm by not allowing Muslims into our country...America.

Your "men" example to be considered equal would have to involve a place filled with nothing but women...so lets play that. You live in a country with nothing but women and there is no rape. Men start coming in across the border, using visas and as refugees. They enter your country and the rate of rape jumps like crazy. You would be 100% justified in suggesting getting all the men out of your country and not allowing them to come back in. Hell...think of how pissed you would be at your leader if they refused and kept letting these rapists in anyway to benefit themselves.

THAT is a fair comparison. How do you feel about THAT example?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I think it is time to stop people coming here that are of any possible threat. Allow me to ask you this. Lets pretend (or maybe this is correct) that you agree that the USA should allow Syrian refugees to come to the USA. I would ask you this. How many American lives are you willing to risk by bringing these people, who we know have been infiltrated by ISIS? I would hope your answer would be...none...your not willing to risk a single American life to bring these people here. And my response would be that you therefore can't let them in.

But to go a step further...in this case it is about Obama. If he is going to let a threat into the USA then I believe he should be personally responsible for any harm or death that comes to any American citizen based upon his choice. Why? Because he knows that there is a possible threat but allows these people to come in anyway. Therefore...why shouldn't he take responsibility?

Oops..clicked quote.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

James Holmes belonged here and was here legally. Dylan Roof as well as Adam Lanza. Are you trying to tell me that all the rapes that happened in America were perpetrated by illegals and immigrants? Some may have been, but the common thread here is they were all MEN. Get rid of men, you get rid of the problem. Get me?

And by the way...you are quoting insane murderers, not terrorists. We as a country need to address mental illness, but we don't. The insane shouldn't be able to get guns. I'm on board with that. But terrorists are a big step above murderers. These are people who love and live for their God and they believe their God wants everyone else dead or converted. These aren't murderers, mass-murderers nor genocidal. They believe that everyone but them should be wiped out. They won't stop...and they will die trying.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

But not all Muslims are terrorists. I guess you'll respond with, "but all terrorists are Muslim".

You still didn't address the rape problem. Not all men are rapists, but all rapists are men.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Sure I did. Did you read my example? If you did...you know my example is representative of the Muslim problem. If you disagree...you are of course welcome to. But if you act like it doesn't make sense and doesn't portray an equivalent example...you are either lying or have an agenda.

It is an entirely different situation when there are outsiders coming into your community and killing people. You CAN keep them out or send they away. You aren't required to allow them to stay and continue hurting others. That is different than looking at your community and throwing people out. An example of throwing people out would be if we were speaking about blacks, for example. You know there is a difference from letting Muslims in and throwing black people out...right?

But you know and understand that. I believe you are just trying to make a point that...I'm sorry to say...is pointless.

And no...not all Muslims are terrorists. In fact, it is a very small percentage. But if you wanted to keep your child safe, you would never even take a 1% chance if you could solve it by simply not allowing that person in your home.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Ah, didn't see that post - thanks.

In my example, we just wouldn't allow men into the country at all - as visitors or with visas or as refugees - just like your Muslim example.

My point is, there is no reason to punish millions of innocent people for the sins of the few. There are millions of innocent Muslims - American citizens - in this country, as well as millions of innocent Muslim refugees.

You have way more chance of getting killed in a car accident than being shot by a terrorist. And yet, millions of people get in cars every day.

a reply to: kaylaluv

But using your paragraph (roughly) there is no reason to risk the life of a fellow countryman (or woman...ha-ha) just to let some Muslims in. We know we are targets...high value targets and they would love to hit us more than any other country. We know this is how Paris was pulled off with ISIS hiding among refugees. Why risk the life of a single "family" member when we can simply say "no"? I wouldn't do that in my own home to my own family so why should I do that to my neighbors? I don't think you would risk your own family either. I don't think anyone would say..."yeah...why not take a chance". THAT is what our government is saying..."lets take a chance". Scary huh?

And...how is it a punishment to say that we don't want to take a chance that your group has been infiltrated? There is no punishment. Hell...we give more to Muslims and Muslim countries than any other nation in the world. So give us a little exception in return by not being offended that we wish to be cautious.