So, I figured it out. If the Republicans just replaced "gun" with "Mexican", we wouldn't be having these gun debates.
I'm no fan of illegal immigration, but it's complete ludicrous that Republicans care more about allowing immigrants to work than preventing people from buying certain fire arms. According to the Republican's immigration plan, a "Mexican" has to "prove" him or herself with years of background checks with a national database to get a job, but any 'ol Joe can buy an assault riffle with no questions asked? Furthermore, getting a background check and being in a data base is in infringement of freedom? Just not when you're a Mexican?!
WTF....people...WTF..
I know that I'm preaching to the choir.. just annoying
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- National Gun background check denied
National Gun background check deniedFollow
Would have like to see something happen with all that, it didn't. Seemed like there should have been some acceptable compromise or common ground or something there. Haven't read much about it yet. What reason are the 'no' vote people giving for why they voted no?
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
someproteinguy wrote:
What reason are the 'no' vote people giving for why they voted no?
NRA campaigns spread lies that the law would make it illegal for a grandfather to give his grandson a gun.
Edited, Apr 17th 2013 9:16pm by TirithRR
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Almalieque wrote:
So, I figured it out. If the Republicans just replaced "gun" with "Mexican", we wouldn't be having these gun debates.
Jon Stewart made that joke last night on the Daily Show, too.
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
So, I figured it out. If the Republicans just replaced "gun" with "Mexican", we wouldn't be having these gun debates.
Jon Stewart made that joke last night on the Daily Show, too.
It's kind of an off kilter joke though. We already document citizens, so it's not like it's a great affront to want to document non-citizens who come to the US, right (and I love how "illegal immigrant" gets changed to "immigrant" and then to "Mexican" btw)? Documenting the exercise of a constitutional right is an entirely different issue.
Edited, Apr 17th 2013 7:00pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Gun rights and immigration are totally the same thing.
Totally.
Totally.
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.
Demea wrote:
Gun rights and immigration are totally the same thing.
Totally.
Totally.
According to some people, apparently.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Well, good thing this was about expanding the transactions that required background checks and not documenting all guns and owners... or stopping Jimmy from getting a gun from his Grandpa.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#9gbaji,
Posted: Apr 17 2013 at 8:36 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) The concern was that there were not any provisions prohibiting the government from retaining information beyond simply verifying legality for a purchase, and thus by default such data would be retained and thus form the core of exactly the sort of gun tracking database which folks were concerned about. Just a few months ago a whole bunch of people argued on this very forum that since applying for a firearm permit was public information, there was nothing wrong with collecting that data and even making it available to the public so that a news agency could create an online map with the names and addresses of registered gun owners. Anyone who took that position then, but is trying to claim that this wouldn't be used in a similar manner now strikes me as false.
I've got to laugh a bit, cause right now the "T.M.I." episode of South Park is on.
Just seems to fit so perfectly.
Just seems to fit so perfectly.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Jon Stewart made that joke
gbaji wrote:
Demea wrote:
Gun rights and immigration are totally the same thing.
Totally.
Totally.
According to some people, apparently.
Which part of "joke" is it that you don't understand?
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
So, I figured it out. If the Republicans just replaced "gun" with "Mexican", we wouldn't be having these gun debates.
Jon Stewart made that joke last night on the Daily Show, too.
I didn't see it yet, I have it DVR'd.
gbaji wrote:
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
So, I figured it out. If the Republicans just replaced "gun" with "Mexican", we wouldn't be having these gun debates.
Jon Stewart made that joke last night on the Daily Show, too.
It's kind of an off kilter joke though. We already document citizens, so it's not like it's a great affront to want to document non-citizens who come to the US, right (and I love how "illegal immigrant" gets changed to "immigrant" and then to "Mexican" btw)? Documenting the exercise of a constitutional right is an entirely different issue.
Edited, Apr 17th 2013 7:00pm by gbaji
I was referring to the amount of "red tape" that republicans are requiring for an illegal immigrant to become a citizen. I don't favor illegal immigration, but it's hypocritical to want series of background checks, nation wide use of e-verify (national data base which isn't used by everyone) for people who want to work in the US, then complain about having the same, similar or less restrictions in regards to certain fire arms. So it's "ok' to have "show me your papers law", but don't ask Jimmy nothing about his gun. It's totally hypocrisy that shows that people in the government (regardless of political preference) are more about their personal gain than the nation.
Furthermore, these are the same people who made an outrage of Jay-Z and Beyonce going to Cuba. They weren't pulling a Dennis Rodman, just on vacation. However, the government is sooo bad, because it doesn't listen to and/or favor their people. Yet, here we are, denying a common sense law that the majority of the nation seems to want for own personal gain.
I realize that our governments are not the same, just pointing out that we aren't ones to judge.
The concern was that there were not any provisions prohibiting the government from retaining information beyond simply verifying legality for a purchase, and thus by default such data would be retained and thus form the core of exactly the sort of gun tracking database which folks were concerned about. Just a few months ago a whole bunch of people argued on this very forum that since applying for a firearm permit was public information, there was nothing wrong with collecting that data and even making it available to the public so that a news agency could create an online map with the names and addresses of registered gun owners. Anyone who took that position then, but is trying to claim that this wouldn't be used in a similar manner now strikes me as false.
It should be used that way. I still don't see the problem. Then again, I'm not a terrified coward who thinks I have to carry a gun at all times to protect me from whatever I'm afraid of this week. Is it still dark skinned people, or is it jack booted government thugs this week? I don't keep up with the coward newsletters.
It should be used that way. I still don't see the problem. Then again, I'm not a terrified coward who thinks I have to carry a gun at all times to protect me from whatever I'm afraid of this week. Is it still dark skinned people, or is it jack booted government thugs this week? I don't keep up with the coward newsletters.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
Then again, I'm not a terrified coward who thinks I have to carry a gun at all times to protect me from whatever I'm afraid of this week.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
lolgaxe wrote:
Guns are loud man. And scary.
Like women.
Edited, Apr 19th 2013 5:00pm by stupidmonkey
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Ultimately it keeps coming back to the government collecting information on who has guns, so they can later take them away. Regardless of how vehemently Pres Obama denies that this will happen, some citizens are still skeptical.
I can't imagine why.
I can't imagine why.
Some people are like slinkies, they aren't really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
Kakar wrote:
I can't imagine why.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with a certain multi million dollar organizations's campaign against gun control.
Edited, Apr 20th 2013 8:42pm by TirithRR
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Pretty sure the government didn't take away our cars...
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
TirithRR wrote:
Yes I am. Voluntarily selling your POS car for some money isn't the same as the government taking away your car without your permission. That is, unless I'm missing something.
That's just the first step. The government reimbursing you for voluntarily turning in your gun...
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Is it just me, or is Alma slowly drifting more and more left?
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.
LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
That doesn't make sense. No one is making you sell anything. So, if you want it, then don't sell it. If you sell it, that isn't the government.
You honestly believe that the US is planning on taking away our cars? How do you expect people to get to work? Using our great public transportation?
You honestly believe that the US is planning on taking away our cars? How do you expect people to get to work? Using our great public transportation?
Nilatai wrote:
Is it just me, or is Alma slowly drifting more and more left?
My views have been consistent on these forums. I am and always will be an independent.
I'm pretty sure the car thing was a joke, Alma.
Given the arguments that I've been hearing lately, it's hard to tell..
/whooosh if so..
/whooosh if so..
Recent Visitors: 229
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (229)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- National Gun background check denied
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC