Dems stage sit-in on House floor to push for gun vote

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: introvert

All law abiding American citizens are afforded their rights, including Muslims.

Placing bans on people on no-fly list or terror watch list, is not only unconstitutional, it is also RACIST; due to the disproportionate amount of Muslim Americans on those lists.

Anyone who supports anti-constitutional policies, such as 'no fly, no buy' are racist bigots. Republicans included.

Do you support the 'no fly no buy' policy introvert? Please tell me.

Islam and being Muslim is NOT a RACE!!!

a reply to: GodEmperor

No. I do not support the policy.

I think there are enough rules in place and no matter what we do, some crazy loons are going to get their hands on firearms and cause serious damage.

Ask our fellow member Neo why he doesn't believe Muslims should be able to exercise their 2nd amendment right.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Oh a sit-in. Flashing back to the 60s.....

Yeah...heaven forbid our representatives actually represent us and not the people who line many of their pockets and put some sane requirements and safeguards around owning weapons and keeping them out of the wrong hands.

Damn brown shirts!

Sane? So, passing unconstitutional bills is sane? How so? Sane is discussing an issue and coming up with a solution that addresses the problem without stripping citizens of their rights. That is sane.

a reply to: introvert

I'm not ignoring. I am recognizing that Muslims would be part of that list that the Democrats are pushing and your approach is very similar.

Now your making SNIP up.

My approach is restoring GUN RIGHTS back to what the FF intended.

Unlike the defenders of this SNIP.

Feinstein's bill, which was rejected by the Senate on Monday, would grant the attorney general authority to block a gun sale if there is "reasonable belief" that the firearm would be used for terrorism. The measure would further require a procedure so that the Justice Department would be notified if a person investigated for terrorism in the last five years tries to buy a gun.

Then the threw a temper tantrum until they get their way.

a reply to: Butterfinger

Technically there really aren't races at all. But that doesn't stop people from being bigots.

a reply to: neo96

No pity for the activists progressive dems. Lets them be washed away.

a reply to: neo96

It's going to suck if trump gets elected and he starts using EO to make no fly lists and control Muslim immigration. Prob just as bad as if the other crook get elected.

a reply to: Kali74

Ha. Thanks. I actually have one of those. If you have any other suggestions, I'd welcome them too. (Time is a premium. I tried the other night and snoozed right around musket balls!)

#NoBillNoBreak

a reply to: neo96

You can easily shut me up by saying that Muslims have the same 2nd amendment right as anyone else.

Why is that so hard and why do you have to deflect on to other people?

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: angeldoll

We are a democracy. We vote on things.

We had a VOTE on it Monday.

And the 'asses' lost.

How bout they stop being them.

The vote was in the Senate. This is the House.

a reply to: GodEmperor

Placing bans on people on no-fly list or terror watch list, is not only unconstitutional, it is also RACIST; due to the disproportionate amount of Muslim Americans on those lists.

Isn't it simply precious ?

To listen to them.

They whined about banning muslims from entering the country but are trying to DENY them their RIGHTS here.

They say the first part was RACIST.

They say that was XENOPHOBIC.

They say that is Islamphobia.

And they turn around and push NO FLY NO BUY.

So not only do they deny them travel.

They deny them from buying weapons!

Absolutely precious!

a reply to: luthier

Understood, but "Racism" is a loaded term more than ever before.

Got to call it out when its misused to garner emotional support

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: neo96

You can easily shut me up by saying that Muslims have the same 2nd amendment right as anyone else.

Why is that so hard and why do you have to deflect on to other people?

For the LAST TIME.

Democrats are the ones saying it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Oh a sit-in. Flashing back to the 60s.....

Yeah...heaven forbid our representatives actually represent us and not the people who line many of their pockets and put some sane requirements and safeguards around owning weapons and keeping them out of the wrong hands.

Damn brown shirts!

Sane? So, passing unconstitutional bills is sane? How so? Sane is discussing an issue and coming up with a solution that addresses the problem without stripping citizens of their rights. That is sane.

Yes, Sane.

None of these bills strip any "rights." Unless you're whining about the no-fly and watch lists, which if you're on em you're one em and wouldn't it be nice to know that you are when you go to purchase a gun so you can get off them?

a reply to: neo96

The Republican presidential candidate is also pushing no fly and no buy.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: neo96

You can easily shut me up by saying that Muslims have the same 2nd amendment right as anyone else.

Why is that so hard and why do you have to deflect on to other people?

For the LAST TIME.

Democrats are the ones saying it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ok. Sure.

Why wont you say that Muslims have the same right?

You keep avoiding it because you are anti-2nd based upon someone's religion.

Again, you have common ground with the Democrats.

a reply to: ~Lucidity
Considering nobody responsible for mass shootings has been on the list I don't see how this addresses the issue at all.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: butcherguy

I meant to say well regulated militia. Regardless, it doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong about the framers intentions, it is what it is now and guns are too prolific in America to do anything meaningful about now. I just think it's ignorant to misuse words in order to circle-jerk.

Well if the guns and the regulations about having a weapon and so much ammo and a go bag were intended at the time for militias when a standing national army didn't exist, that gets into a whole deal about the Militia Act and how it changed through the years. I've been trying to unwind that in my spare time for a while now. I don't make a lot of progress most of the time as there are so many opinions out there it's hard to tell those from fact.

I believe you are misunderstanding the meaning of "well regulated" in this context. It does NOT mean adding regulatory laws to control or otherwise "infringe" upon that right. The term "well regulated" had a different meaning in the 18th Century. Here are a few screenshots to help put this phrase into perspective and show that is means "well trained" "orderly", in other words, organized.


And, with respect to training of militia, or "training bands" as they were also known............


Link to online version of the book from Google Books - A General Dictionary of the English Language (published in 1780)

Odd how people who cheered and supported 6 years of total obstructionism in Congress are now infuriated by a couple hours of #NoBillNoBreak.

a reply to: neo96

That's what she says. He must have still been on some list or another.

Another source, though without seeing the amendments to the bill in their entirety and knowing what they know, it's hard to tell where they would have nabbed him.

Dianne Feinstein: Dems' proposed gun law would have prevented Orlando

a reply to: Krakatoa

Thanks. I've read about 1000 opinions, but I'm trying to decipher it myself in the context of history and the Militia Act, the Federalist Papers, and the Anti-Federalist Papers and then some.