BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
BIMMERPOST Universal Forums Off-Topic Discussions Board Politics/Religion Worst Mass Shooting in US History Last Night! 50 Killed! ORLANDO, FL

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-12-2016, 08:11 PM   #89
Whostheboss
Captain
Whostheboss's Avatar
364
Rep
843
Posts

Drives: a 9incher
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: No. Virginia U.S.A.

iTrader: (0)

Crazy
__________________
WHO'S THE BOSS
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 08:12 PM   #90
RoundelObsession
Banned
United_States
247
Rep
1,176
Posts

Drives: S65M3
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Texas

iTrader: (39)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbbbmw View Post
"Assault weapons" is somewhat of a misnomer - they are actually a different form of hunting rifle. They are very rarely used in any crime (something like 2%), but banning them is seen as paving the way to banning all guns:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-handgun-bans/
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 08:14 PM   #91
TXSTYLE
BIGMARCUS
TXSTYLE's Avatar
United_States
5520
Rep
2,801
Posts

Drives: F01 & F15 / Mineral White
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The GYM! (The Burbs - N TX)

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by prodigymix View Post
Laws like that were some of the first things that came to mind while I was watching the FBI rep in Orlando state that he had twice previously been the subject of their investigations, going so far as interviewing him, because of claims of extremism and affiliation with a known terrorist.

If I get a little too rowdy after a bunch of drinks on a plane I can be added to the no-fly list with EASE.... but this guy gets investigated by the FBI not once, but TWICE for having terroristic ties and he can still jump into Bucks Guns & Ammo and buy up whatever he wants?

If you've done something with enough merit to have any 3 character agency look into your history, friends, family, acquaintances, internet activity...and even INTERVIEW you, you need to be permanently relieved of your right to legally bare arms.

I understand them saying that he was never officially 'charged' or the investigation never turned any credible info -- but the fact of the matter is that he came across your radar TWICE for similar characteristics -- that's a red fucking flag if I ever saw one. He had no business (legally) owning any guns.

Would that have prevented this? Maybe... maybe not, but it probably would've made it that much less likely.
Agreed 100%
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 08:21 PM   #92
TXSTYLE
BIGMARCUS
TXSTYLE's Avatar
United_States
5520
Rep
2,801
Posts

Drives: F01 & F15 / Mineral White
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The GYM! (The Burbs - N TX)

iTrader: (0)

My sincere hope is that these types of heinous, deadly crimes stop. Wishful thinking at best I know...
But at the least, buying guns, especially these types, should be a very restrictive privilege for only our most capable and legitimate citizens. Should not be as simple as buying a cup of coffee.
Heck at least price them out of the hands of just anybody. Something is better than nothing...
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 08:49 PM   #93
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TXSTYLE View Post
Just like Republicans aka the GOP love to BLOCK legislation aka LAWS that would have prevented suspected TERRORISTS from purchasing guns legally!
Pubs have always been deep in the pockets of the NRA.
So that some of you who may not be versed in American Politics and Laws are clear, read this very insightful yet disturbing article here:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-block...ts-buying-guns

For the 'click-impaired':



Although I don't owe anyone here or abroad any details on my beliefs or possessions or former employment, I own 2 very capable handguns for protection of myself and family should that unlikely event ever arise. Here in TX, I could easily obtain a AR-15 or more if I was so inclined. The thing is, for what? Oh that's right... To protect my family from would-be assailants who just happen to have assault rifles in their possession. In all my previous years of law enforcement and the plethora of local, state and federal officers I still know and talk with including family members, I've never heard of such a case where a family or individual was "protecting himself, home or family from armed individuals using assault weapons". We're not talking about if you just happen to be involved with Drug Cartels or Criminal Organizations of course. So the statistics simply are what they are. These particular weapons are made specifically to take out or kill many human beings at once.
Let's not turn a blind eye to the above facts and the fact that Republicans specifically BLOCKED laws that would make Americans much safer.
Ignorance is bliss.
You and NBC neglect the facts that the republicans asked for measures to include blocking people deemed mentally ill to be prevented from getting guns was blocked by dick durbin, that this legislation would not have stopped any of the terrorists from getting their guns, San Bernardino etc, and that the terrorism watch list is fatally flawed. It includes thousands of incorrect names, and there is no stated set of rules as to why you can get on the list or recourse to get off the list if you are put on incorrectly, so this law would have infringed upon the constitutional rights of thousands of law abiding Americans. If the administration would actually set the rules on paper about how you got on the list and you could dispute this in court then I'm sure it would have passed.
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:06 PM   #94
Beartato
Major
Beartato's Avatar
860
Rep
1,205
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Utah

iTrader: (0)

My hats off to you, fundguy, you managed to make a political post without resorting to generalizing all liberals into the antagonists of your "us vs them" simplistic mentality. Gold star!
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:08 PM   #95
M2BMW
Lieutenant
114
Rep
581
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jul 2008

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
You and NBC neglect the facts that the republicans asked for measures to include blocking people deemed mentally ill to be prevented from getting guns was blocked by dick durbin, that this legislation would not have stopped any of the terrorists from getting their guns, San Bernardino etc, and that the terrorism watch list is fatally flawed. It includes thousands of incorrect names, and there is no stated set of rules as to why you can get on the list or recourse to get off the list if you are put on incorrectly, so this law would have infringed upon the constitutional rights of thousands of law abiding Americans. If the administration would actually set the rules on paper about how you got on the list and you could dispute this in court then I'm sure it would have passed.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...tion/76714608/
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:12 PM   #96
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Assault weapon is the liberal way to use language to push an aenda just like they use undocumented immigrant. An assault weapon is a full automatic or burst fire weapon designed for military use. The rifles they label as assault weapon are no different from many hunting rifles in function. They are semiautomatic and legal as per ATF rules. ATF dies recognize assault weapons as special and has additional provisions to purchase these legally in all 50 states. Belt fed machine guns, silencers, grenade launchers, canons, rpgs, etc an all be owned legally with the right permits.
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:15 PM   #97
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M2BMW View Post
Bing.
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:17 PM   #98
M2BMW
Lieutenant
114
Rep
581
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jul 2008

iTrader: (0)

http://www.eclectablog.com/2013/08/1...president.html

#9
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:19 PM   #99
TrevorM3
Major General
1612
Rep
6,340
Posts

Drives: 6.3 AMG
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Florida

iTrader: (0)

i hope the remaining victims get the blood they need, and they all make it thru
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:24 PM   #100
M2BMW
Lieutenant
114
Rep
581
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jul 2008

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
Bing.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b011b83a6bc0cd

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b08e945fee73e5
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:34 PM   #101
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M2BMW View Post
And quite correctly.
1 the Brady Bill. Stupidest gun law ever. The idea is if you're angry, you have to wait 10 days to get a gun so you'll cool down. The reality, nobody angry bent on killing someone is going to go buy a gun. They'll just wack you with a bat or stab you with a knife, etc. There were really no examples of murders this would have prevented and it only applies to handguns, not rifles, as if you can't kill someone wit a shotgun, but a 9mm, watch out.

The reverse is now a woman threatened by an ex who says he's going to kill her, which does happen, has to wait 10 days to protect herself. Dumb.

Secondly it says republicans were for background checks. They were, they are, and there is. What's the problem? Everytime you purchase a firearm from a gun dealer, gun show, whatever there is a background check.

The "gun show loophole" is as badly named as the assault weapon. There is no such thing. It's the private sale loophole. You can legally sell a firearm between two private parties without a background check. This is not a gun show phenomenon. It's opposed because the Democrats won't make exceptions for things like buying your 12 yr old kid a 22 rifle for Christmas, or selling a rifle to your hunting buddy, without going to a gun store and paying for background checks, transfers, etc. It is illegal to sell to someone who you doubt can legally own it. I'm not happy with this ban but some middleground needs to be found and neither side wants to budge. The buy a gun on the Internet is 100% false as gun dealers are required by law to send the gun to a licensed firearms dealer and have a background check performed. It is illegal to just mail it to your house. But I hear this every time there is a liberal trying to ban guns. Total BS.
Appreciate 3
      06-12-2016, 09:35 PM   #102
Mr Tonka
is probably out riding.
Mr Tonka's Avatar
United_States
5853
Rep
2,299
Posts

Drives: Something Italian
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweatypeninsula

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TXSTYLE View Post
I'll wait for a legitimate response as to why this law was blocked by Republicans and also if you agree with the legislation and why or not?
Show me the WHOLE bill and i'll likely show you why it was blocked. Just because the bill was "aimed" at doing something doesn't mean it wasn't chocked full of other garbage or wasn't too loosely put together to make sense.

Look at the legislation that was thrust onto the citizens of NY just after Sandyhook. It was so poorly written it basically excluded law enforcement from having more than 10 round mags for their pistols. The entire law had to be amended after the fact to keep LEOs from being criminals.

Take the legalization of weed in FL as another example. I told people that i voted against it and get chastised for it. I asked them if they read the bill and the answer is always no. Well, the bill was shit, poorly written and did not have all the bases covered. The next time it hits the floor it'll likely be written better and garner more votes.

While our government seems to be comprised of idiots only looking after their own interests, some times what they do has good reason behind it. This is the same reason there was so much resistance to Obama Care as well. No one knew what was in it, who was paying for it, etc....

The devil is in the details and if you didn't read the whole bill, i personally don't think you should be upset about the ELECTED officials blocking it for what ever reason. Find a bill that makes good sense all around that doesn't infringe on law abiding citizen's rights and it'll likely also be a bill that passes.
__________________
"There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice. -Charles de Secondat"
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic59612_1.gif
Appreciate 1
      06-12-2016, 09:43 PM   #103
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Want to pass some gum laws? How about these:
A federal concealed carry permit valid anywhere in the US based on the same general laws thar 40+ states already use to issue them.

A law requiring people deemed mentally incompetent or potentially dangerous to others by a psychiatric physician to not be allowed to own or buy guns

A law that anyone who pledges allegance to isis or other foreign terrorist organizations be banned from owning guns, citizenship revoked, and a plane ticket to a country of their choice.

Laws that penalize criminals who use firearms with mandatory sentences. 10 yrs if you have an illegal firearm, 25 yrs if you use a firearm to commit a crime. 95% of firearm crimes are committed by repeat offenders and convicted felons. This would disuse them from firearm crime.

These laws would go after the problems, the crazies, the terrorists, and the criminals, not the law abiding citizens protecting themselves from the formerly stated. This is what republicans want and liberals don't.
Appreciate 2
      06-12-2016, 09:48 PM   #104
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Again my sincere condolences to the people aND loved ones who were victimized by this Islamic radical and isis. The only bright light in this is the jerk got to meet Allah. My gay friend was almost there with friends but last minute went somewhere else. At least he recognizes his enemy is Islamic radicals and the liberal administration who keeps making excuses for them and using incidents like this to push an agenda instead of placing blame where it belongs and not republicans who are trying to protect them and every other US citizen.
Appreciate 1
      06-12-2016, 09:50 PM   #105
Mr Tonka
is probably out riding.
Mr Tonka's Avatar
United_States
5853
Rep
2,299
Posts

Drives: Something Italian
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweatypeninsula

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
And quite correctly.
1 the Brady Bill. Stupidest gun law ever. The idea is if you're angry, you have to wait 10 days to get a gun so you'll cool down. The reality, nobody angry bent on killing someone is going to go buy a gun. They'll just wack you with a bat or stab you with a knife, etc. There were really no examples of murders this would have prevented and it only applies to handguns, not rifles, as if you can't kill someone wit a shotgun, but a 9mm, watch out.

The reverse is now a woman threatened by an ex who says he's going to kill her, which does happen, has to wait 10 days to protect herself. Dumb.

Secondly it says republicans were for background checks. They were, they are, and there is. What's the problem? Everytime you purchase a firearm from a gun dealer, gun show, whatever there is a background check.

The "gun show loophole" is as badly named as the assault weapon. There is no such thing. It's the private sale loophole. You can legally sell a firearm between two private parties without a background check. This is not a gun show phenomenon. It's opposed because the Democrats won't make exceptions for things like buying your 12 yr old kid a 22 rifle for Christmas, or selling a rifle to your hunting buddy, without going to a gun store and paying for background checks, transfers, etc. It is illegal to sell to someone who you doubt can legally own it. I'm not happy with this ban but some middleground needs to be found and neither side wants to budge. The buy a gun on the Internet is 100% false as gun dealers are required by law to send the gun to a licensed firearms dealer and have a background check performed. It is illegal to just mail it to your house. But I hear this every time there is a liberal trying to ban guns. Total BS.
Ignorance is bliss, right? All of the above is correct.


People bitch about these lax gun laws when every single gun purchased from a retailer or over the internet has to go through an FBI back ground check. EVERY ONE!

Someone tell me why we need MORE laws on the books when the FBI, who has interviewed this person of interest TWICE, doesn't have the capacity to flag the same person when they do their NICS background check NECESSARY to buy their legal guns? What sane person thinks more laws are good when they can't even in force or use the current laws to their potential?
__________________
"There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice. -Charles de Secondat"
http://www.m3post.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic59612_1.gif
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:54 PM   #106
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

From a friend who works at a downtown club in Orlando.
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 09:59 PM   #107
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Not sure of the validly but wouldn't be surprised if law enforcement was suppressing this to try to find the guys and not have them go to ground first.
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 10:14 PM   #108
RoundelObsession
Banned
United_States
247
Rep
1,176
Posts

Drives: S65M3
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Texas

iTrader: (39)

Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 10:15 PM   #109
M2BMW
Lieutenant
114
Rep
581
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jul 2008

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
Want to pass some gum laws? How about these:
A federal concealed carry permit valid anywhere in the US based on the same general laws thar 40+ states already use to issue them.

A law requiring people deemed mentally incompetent or potentially dangerous to others by a psychiatric physician to not be allowed to own or buy guns

A law that anyone who pledges allegance to isis or other foreign terrorist organizations be banned from owning guns, citizenship revoked, and a plane ticket to a country of their choice.

Laws that penalize criminals who use firearms with mandatory sentences. 10 yrs if you have an illegal firearm, 25 yrs if you use a firearm to commit a crime. 95% of firearm crimes are committed by repeat offenders and convicted felons. This would disuse them from firearm crime.

These laws would go after the problems, the crazies, the terrorists, and the criminals, not the law abiding citizens protecting themselves from the formerly stated. This is what republicans want and liberals don't.
Putting your opinion, "This is what republicans want and liberals don't" aside.

So with the republican majority, why no legislation? Could it be because of the NRA, Republicans don't have the backbone to do anything? Could it be the disfunction within the republican party and the "lets shut done the govt" attitude instead of working across the aisle for a solution?

What gun control or any legislation has the republican party delivered even with the majority to ensure the safety of people from gun violence?

It is just a reality, this has to be a bipartisan effort, not a "I'm going to take my football and go home if I don't get my way".

So how many more of these tragedies does our country have to go through? will there be more excuses or action?

I would think that the safety of people should have at least the same amount of importance from the Republicans as the repeal of Obama care.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politi...215-story.html
Appreciate 0
      06-12-2016, 10:25 PM   #110
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Again, republicans propose laws against criminals and crazies with guns, democrats propose laws against law abiding gun owners. Each side blocks the other. Legal gun ownin carry permit holders are the lowest gun crime group in the country. 95% of gun crimes are committed by felons and repeat offenders.

Every mass shooting I've ever seen has been perpetrated by a mentally ill person or terrorist. Republicans want to stop terrorists from coming here and stamp them out. They don't need a gun to do terrorism, i.e. Boston, nor would the laws proposed by democrats have stopped them, i.e. San Bernardino.

So which makes more sense? The ones taking the guns out of your hands leaving you defenseless, or the ones going after the guys doing the killing?
Appreciate 1
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 AM.




bmw
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST