Jump to content

another shooting in San Bernadino CA


Val22

Recommended Posts

2nd amendment, which I wouldn't expect you to understand the significance of



Sadly it seems to be getting more an more polarized.........

Imagine the trainwreck if we get a Republican President along with a GOP congress........Might have to move to Canada in that case...I hear Vancouver is nice....


yea that's what George Clooney said once, still here though,

but if you wanted to move to the land of the yellow, I'd buy your ticket

Edited by shades
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

Edited by bran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

What percentage of people on the no fly list are there by bureaucratic fuck up? Say it's ten percent - are we willing to continue allowing easy access to guns those deemed to dangerous to fly commercially because a few people can't make a few calls to rectify a bureaucratic fuck up? To me, that's crazy and another example of fear and paranoia taking precedent over the common good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

What percentage of people on the no fly list are there by bureaucratic fuck up? Say it's ten percent - are we willing to continue allowing easy access to guns those deemed to dangerous to fly commercially because a few people can't make a few calls to rectify a bureaucratic fuck up? To me, that's crazy and another example of fear and paranoia taking precedent over the common good.

so we just allow those 10% to lose their rights? we have to agree to disagree on this one, to me taking away rights without any kind of due process is insane.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

What percentage of people on the no fly list are there by bureaucratic fuck up? Say it's ten percent - are we willing to continue allowing easy access to guns those deemed to dangerous to fly commercially because a few people can't make a few calls to rectify a bureaucratic fuck up? To me, that's crazy and another example of fear and paranoia taking precedent over the common good.

so we just allow those 10% to lose their rights? we have to agree to disagree on this one, to me taking away rights without any kind of due process is insane.

Those who are improperly included on the no fly list have legal recourse to rectify the oversight. You're speaking as though those wrongly included are on the list for life, which isn't the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

What percentage of people on the no fly list are there by bureaucratic fuck up? Say it's ten percent - are we willing to continue allowing easy access to guns those deemed to dangerous to fly commercially because a few people can't make a few calls to rectify a bureaucratic fuck up? To me, that's crazy and another example of fear and paranoia taking precedent over the common good.

so we just allow those 10% to lose their rights? we have to agree to disagree on this one, to me taking away rights without any kind of due process is insane.

Those who are improperly included on the no fly list have legal recourse to rectify the oversight. You're speaking as though those wrongly included are on the list for life, which isn't the case.

read this: the huffington post is hardly considered a right wing publication.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-list_n_5617599.html

in 2013 alone 468,000 people were recommended for the no fly list, courts rejected 1% of those claims..... you have no due process, you are literally guilty before innocent which is against everything the US stands for. you literally can post song lyrics on facebook and your on the terror watch list, and you get to lose your gun rights, then you get to appeal your case in front of the people who put you on the fucking list to begin, sound really fair and rational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

What percentage of people on the no fly list are there by bureaucratic fuck up? Say it's ten percent - are we willing to continue allowing easy access to guns those deemed to dangerous to fly commercially because a few people can't make a few calls to rectify a bureaucratic fuck up? To me, that's crazy and another example of fear and paranoia taking precedent over the common good.

so we just allow those 10% to lose their rights? we have to agree to disagree on this one, to me taking away rights without any kind of due process is insane.
Those who are improperly included on the no fly list have legal recourse to rectify the oversight. You're speaking as though those wrongly included are on the list for life, which isn't the case.

read this: the huffington post is hardly considered a right wing publication.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-list_n_5617599.html

in 2013 alone 468,000 people were recommended for the no fly list, courts rejected 1% of those claims..... you have no due process, you are literally guilty before innocent which is against everything the US stands for. you literally can post song lyrics on facebook and your on the terror watch list, and you get to lose your gun rights, then you get to appeal your case in front of the people who put you on the fucking list to begin, sound really fair and rational.

I would agree with you if it was demonstrated that the vast majority of people on the no-fly list shouldn't be there. Perhaps that's the case, but I've come across no evidence of that. Simply pointing out that only 1 percent of those submitted for inclusion were rejected doesn't not necessarily translate in an inaccurate list.

Moreover, if you find yourself wrongly on the no fly list, something tells me you have bigger problems than not being able to own a gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know how many people on the no fly list are just on there because of where they came from? there were people put on the list for simply calling relatives back home(be it pakistan or any other arab country) you know how many people were put on that list just because they have a name similar to a terrorist? ted kennedy ended up on the list and government admitted the list is "imperfect", so we are going to take away legal citizens rights because of a bureaucratic fuck up? sounds legit.

What percentage of people on the no fly list are there by bureaucratic fuck up? Say it's ten percent - are we willing to continue allowing easy access to guns those deemed to dangerous to fly commercially because a few people can't make a few calls to rectify a bureaucratic fuck up? To me, that's crazy and another example of fear and paranoia taking precedent over the common good.

so we just allow those 10% to lose their rights? we have to agree to disagree on this one, to me taking away rights without any kind of due process is insane.
Those who are improperly included on the no fly list have legal recourse to rectify the oversight. You're speaking as though those wrongly included are on the list for life, which isn't the case.

read this: the huffington post is hardly considered a right wing publication.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-list_n_5617599.html

in 2013 alone 468,000 people were recommended for the no fly list, courts rejected 1% of those claims..... you have no due process, you are literally guilty before innocent which is against everything the US stands for. you literally can post song lyrics on facebook and your on the terror watch list, and you get to lose your gun rights, then you get to appeal your case in front of the people who put you on the fucking list to begin, sound really fair and rational.

I would agree with you if it was demonstrated that the vast majority of people on the no-fly list shouldn't be there. Perhaps that's the case, but I've come across no evidence of that. Simply pointing out that only 1 percent of those submitted for inclusion were rejected doesn't not necessarily translate in an inaccurate list.

Moreover, if you find yourself wrongly on the no fly list, something tells me you have bigger problems than not being able to own a gun.

a 18 month old child was literally taken off a plane by security because she was on the no fly list. there is 0 oversight for this. your name can get on there in a million ways. if you think government is infallible and not prone to big fucks ups, like i said before have to agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm agreeing with bran here. Though in my ideal world the 2nd amendment would never have been written in the first place (there, I said it), because it is a right, I do not believe it should be subject to being taken away if no applicable crime has been committed, and especially for something as flimsy as a government watch list. I have always believed in upholding rights over succumbing to fears. Besides that, in real life I have a very, very common name, a name that is the same as other people in my family, and I cannot tell you how many times I have been confused for someone else by the government and other very official things. I have to remain very vigilant about that and even still bullshit comes up frequently. I don't imagine this would be very different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we should actually hire qualified people for TSA, not just, whoever applies. Kind of what we should apply to police officers. Instead you get guys that basically play a match game and have no free will or judgement.

I remember being at Seatac and my wife was trying to get to the gate to meet her daughter, she asked the TSA screener to please try and hurry so she could meet her daughter, who hadn't flown before. The agent replied with, "ma'am, when you rush us, that's when we need to call extra security."

Hire someone who can exercise critical thinking, and when someone who brings a 1-year-old to an airport that vaguely resembles someone on the no fly list, they can use their brain and say, "hey, maybe this baby doesn't have a bomb or box cutters strapped to them."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we should actually hire qualified people for TSA, not just, whoever applies. Kind of what we should apply to police officers. Instead you get guys that basically play a match game and have no free will or judgement.

I remember being at Seatac and my wife was trying to get to the gate to meet her daughter, she asked the TSA screener to please try and hurry so she could meet her daughter, who hadn't flown before. The agent replied with, "ma'am, when you rush us, that's when we need to call extra security."

Hire someone who can exercise critical thinking, and when someone who brings a 1-year-old to an airport that vaguely resembles someone on the no fly list, they can use their brain and say, "hey, maybe this baby doesn't have a bomb or box cutters strapped to them."

then you want to tie in the terror watch list/no fly list with the banning of guns.... it took ted kennedy a us senator multiple appeals to homeland security just to get his name off the list.

i imagine it would go something like this:(not to mention its not like the government has an agenda and would you know abuse power or anything)

legal citizen: im here to buy a hunting rifle

gunshop owner: sure just fill out the forms so we can do a background check and get you squared away

*sometime later*

gunshop owner: it says here you are on a terror watch list i cannot sell you gun

legal citizen: are you fucking kidding me. i have never even been in trouble my whole life and now you are saying i am on a list as a potential terrorist.

gunshop: sounds messed up but you have to call the government and get this straightened around, im sorry.

legal citizen: yes im calling to try and reinstate my second amendment right, i am said to be on some kind of terrorist watch list.

government worker: what is your name

legal citizen: *states name*

government worker: yeah it says here you are on the list

legal citizen: how did i get put on it

government worker: dont know

legal citizen: could it be a mistake?

government worker: dont know

legal citizen: who do i talk to?

government worker: i will patch you through.

homeland security: is your name *insert name*

legal citizen: yes

homeland security: and your 58 years old from syria that wants to potentially join isis?

legal citizen: no, im a 29 year old construction worker from indiana

homeland security: that sounds like something a terrorist would say

legal citizen: no that is the truth

homeland security: sounds like something else a terrorist would say

legal citizen: who do i talk to, to get my rights back?

homeland security: me, i have rejected your claim, you can appeal it anytime you want, we will look into the case.

legal citizen: who will handle the appeal

homeland security: me

its just like the civil forfeiture, cops take your property on some shady ass claim, then when you want to appeal to save your car or house, the people who took your shit are the one's that handle the appeals. not to mention how exactly are you supposed to appeal your case if you had a right(which is fucked up in the first place) taken away? how does one prove they are not a terrorist? isnt the burden of proof on the prosecution? especially when someone who posts song lyrics or music videos is enough to justify being put on a watch list, since realistically we have no fucking clue how these names come up, but we are just supposed to trust the government to be fair and you know not have an agenda or anything.

Edited by bran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the news is saying the guy traveled to Saudi Arabia in the year 2013 and 2014 and then to Pakastan and back to the US. His wife had some kind of bullshit visa. It seems that it's always a visa of some sort and the FBI never catches.

They left behind a 6 month old baby. Now when this baby grows up and finds out what his parents did, how will he take it?

Also had a bomb factory in their home. It seems whatever you need in the US you can get it no problem!

More innocent lives were lost. Was this planned? DUH! Of course it was. I mean no one buys all that shit to just keep it in case.

I guess there are more stupid people who can be brainwashed by other people in certain parts of the world and then they do terrorists attacks.

There is no security. If someone wants to attack you or blow up a building, there's nothing anyone can do about it.

These people just hate and don't think about anything else but that hate. I'm sure they were raising their baby to hate too. I wonder where he will wind up in 20 years or so?

It's a suck world and we're all just trying to survive.

CVRBkkRWUAAcuHJ.jpg

The NRA is donating large sums of money to Republicans, who do nothing to make it harder for people to get their hands on assault weapons.

You go New York Daily News! Yeah, prayers won't get this fixed. Humans are on our own. God is ashamed of all of us and wants nothing to do with the mess man has made of this world. and honestly, I think Satan is having one hell of a time!

But #prayersforparis was ok?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the news is saying the guy traveled to Saudi Arabia in the year 2013 and 2014 and then to Pakastan and back to the US. His wife had some kind of bullshit visa. It seems that it's always a visa of some sort and the FBI never catches.

They left behind a 6 month old baby. Now when this baby grows up and finds out what his parents did, how will he take it?

Also had a bomb factory in their home. It seems whatever you need in the US you can get it no problem!

More innocent lives were lost. Was this planned? DUH! Of course it was. I mean no one buys all that shit to just keep it in case.

I guess there are more stupid people who can be brainwashed by other people in certain parts of the world and then they do terrorists attacks.

There is no security. If someone wants to attack you or blow up a building, there's nothing anyone can do about it.

These people just hate and don't think about anything else but that hate. I'm sure they were raising their baby to hate too. I wonder where he will wind up in 20 years or so?

It's a suck world and we're all just trying to survive.

CVRBkkRWUAAcuHJ.jpg

The NRA is donating large sums of money to Republicans, who do nothing to make it harder for people to get their hands on assault weapons.

You go New York Daily News! Yeah, prayers won't get this fixed. Humans are on our own. God is ashamed of all of us and wants nothing to do with the mess man has made of this world. and honestly, I think Satan is having one hell of a time!
But #prayersforparis was ok?

Charlie Hebdo made that point about Paris too, that they didn't want to be prayed for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NY Times posted an editorial in their front page today. It's the first time they've done so in almost 100 years. The topic was gun control.

The more shooting we have, the more people are realizing (has it taken long fuckin enough?) there needs to be a solution. It's a challenge to redirect the mindset of some who point to a document written over 200 years ago, and tell them times have changed. But the only way to put an end to this epidemic is to elect lawmakers who choose to protect the citizens they have been hired to serve, as opposed to pandering to a powerful and lucrative industry that care nothing about the safety of human lives. It's gonna happen, I have faith.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I just point to the definition of the word "Amendment"?

An amendment is a formal or official change made to a law, contract, constitution, or other legal document. It is based on the verb to amend, which means to change. Amendments can add, remove, or update parts of these agreements. They are often used when it is better to change the document than to write a new one.[1]

It's subject to change by definition you absolute fucknuggets!!!! :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I just point to the definition of the word "Amendment"?

An amendment is a formal or official change made to a law, contract, constitution, or other legal document. It is based on the verb to amend, which means to change. Amendments can add, remove, or update parts of these agreements. They are often used when it is better to change the document than to write a new one.[1]

It's subject to change by definition you absolute fucknuggets!!!! :facepalm:

Yeah, but the first ten are the Bill of Rights and are held as pretty much the most sacred of Constitutional Rights even though most people only know the 1st, 2nd, and 5th. Though they are amendments, to put it very, very loosely with no detail or eye to real accuracy, the Bill of Rights was put in after the original Constitution passed as an "Oh shit, yeah, these are pretty critical rights we really meant to put in he original and should have enumerated. Here they are." It would not be easy to amend the Bill of Rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its just like the civil forfeiture, cops take your property on some shady ass claim, then when you want to appeal to save your car or house, the people who took your shit are the one's that handle the appeals. not to mention how exactly are you supposed to appeal your case if you had a right(which is fucked up in the first place) taken away? how does one prove they are not a terrorist? isnt the burden of proof on the prosecution? especially when someone who posts song lyrics or music videos is enough to justify being put on a watch list, since realistically we have no fucking clue how these names come up, but we are just supposed to trust the government to be fair and you know not have an agenda or anything.

I had an issue with the local police department here a while back. I fought it, using my own money, and won. Afterward therefore, I felt I was entitled to compensation for that, and the court agreed.

Flash forward to 6 years later, I am subject to an FBI background check for a government job that requires me to have a clearance. There is an issue, because they see I was charged for a crime, and there was no not guilty verdict in the case given. Guess whose responsibility it is to submit such a verdict. The local police department. They just happened to not find it important to add "not guilty" to the guy's file that they just had to pay a settlement to. Funny how that works out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the only way to put an end to this epidemic is to elect lawmakers who choose to protect the citizens they have been hired to serve, as opposed to pandering to a powerful and lucrative industry

I think you would find that most people in favor of second amendment rights would ban guns tomorrow if they actually thought it would stop these types of killings.

just sayin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Praying won't help with security of any country.

There will always be a chance of this happening over and over again.

We have to go on living our lives because we don't have a choice. It's going to be where people won't trust their neighbors anymore because you really don't know them at all. I mean so you say hello and smile? What does that mean? People only show the world one side of them and if they are hiding a devious and hateful part, we won't see it until it's too late.

I also don't understand why the news reporters are so surprised that the wife was the one who started this all? Women can be just as dangerous as men.

And as for them hording over 3500 bullets and it doesn't necessarily mean they will use them for bad things is so damn stupid. Who the hell needs all these bullets and weapons in their home especially with a 6 month old baby?

Also, I hate to say it, but where is this baby now? Did they teach it to hate like they did? Will he grow up to do what his parents did? It's something to think about because I believe that some things are born in you and eventually it will come out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I hate to say it, but where is this baby now? Did they teach it to hate like they did? Will he grow up to do what his parents did? It's something to think about because I believe that some things are born in you and eventually it will come out.

well it's 6 months old so I'm doubting Jihad Binkie will be much trouble.

The rest of your points are valid, Sometimes liberlals ask the dumbest things and can't see the obvious when it hits them in their PC faces.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the only way to put an end to this epidemic is to elect lawmakers who choose to protect the citizens they have been hired to serve, as opposed to pandering to a powerful and lucrative industry

I think you would find that most people in favor of second amendment rights would ban guns tomorrow if they actually thought it would stop these types of killings.

just sayin

The tens of millions of dollars used to buy politicians and their votes says otherwise. The gun lobby and NRA are only as rich and powerful as their members allow them to be. These people would ban guns tomorrow? Really? So what's stopping them, the thought that there will be more mass shootings anyway? I see.

I don't know, maybe it's just some sort of weird coincidence, but all the victims of these shootings are never carrying their own arsenal of weapons to fight back. Poor bastards. Perhaps we're looking at this all wrong. Too many restrictions and not enough guns is the real problem. Now there's a thought, right? Or, we can just keep things the way they are because nothing will ever stop these massacres, and besides, a piece of paper over 2 centuries old and a lot of money says we don't really have to change a thing anyways.

Also, I hate to say it, but where is this baby now? Did they teach it to hate like they did? Will he grow up to do what his parents did? It's something to think about because I believe that some things are born in you and eventually it will come out.

Fascinating. So what you're saying is that there's some sort of hate gene that certain groups of people are born with. That's a new one.

Did they teach it to hate like they did? Oh, wow, that's fascinating too. Have you ever been in contact with an infant that age? Because I can't imagine someone would actually pose a question like that if they have. Other than hate, is there anything else one can teach a 6 month old? I'm on the edge of my seat.

I remember reading a study that was done a few years back. I don't recall all the details, but the conclusion was that there was a link between low IQ and prejudice and racism. Not as fascinating as what you've posted, but worth a mention anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I just point to the definition of the word "Amendment"?

An amendment is a formal or official change made to a law, contract, constitution, or other legal document. It is based on the verb to amend, which means to change. Amendments can add, remove, or update parts of these agreements. They are often used when it is better to change the document than to write a new one.[1]

It's subject to change by definition you absolute fucknuggets!!!! :facepalm:

Yeah, but the first ten are the Bill of Rights and are held as pretty much the most sacred of Constitutional Rights even though most people only know the 1st, 2nd, and 5th. Though they are amendments, to put it very, very loosely with no detail or eye to real accuracy, the Bill of Rights was put in after the original Constitution passed as an "Oh shit, yeah, these are pretty critical rights we really meant to put in he original and should have enumerated. Here they are." It would not be easy to amend the Bill of Rights.

this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, maybe it's just some sort of weird coincidence, but all the victims of these shootings are never carrying their own arsenal of weapons to fight back. Poor bastards. Perhaps we're looking at this all wrong. Too many restrictions and not enough guns is the real problem. Now there's a thought, right? Or, we can just keep things the way they are because nothing will ever stop these massacres, and besides, a piece of paper over 2 centuries old and a lot of money says we don't really have to change a thing anyways.

I hesitate to take this conversation any further at the risk of sounding like I am for more guns in society, or even that I am happy as the laws allowing them currently stand, because the truth is I am neither.

that being said, my original point is, imho a valid one.

And in agreement with most gun owners, and that is, with the amount of weapons out there now there is not a piece of legislation that could be passed that can prevent what happened in San Bernadino, or Sandy Hook, or Virginia Tech or any of these mass shootings. There just isn't.

If it would make you feel good if we suddenly "banned" gun possession, or even just banned assault rifles, mega magazines and military style ammo, that is certainly a persons choice.

But again, imho, that would be like handing out placebos to the disillusioned. But I would certainly offer you the glass of water to wash it down.

I don't personally agree with anyone owning an assault rifle and mega ammo, I just don't see the point of the second amendment supporting that.

But the duck has crossed the road on keeping these things out of the hands of people who will use whatever resources available to obtain them.

And I believe if I am not mistaken the shooter in the South Carolina church used only a handgun and killed 9 people in less than 40 seconds.

So unless you can find a way to gather up all the handguns in this country, your point is moot.

Edited by shades
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...