Donald Trump Has Called for Blocking Gun Sales to Terror Suspects

[geronl]

The concept of letting the government strip Americans of their constitutional rights without evidence or proof of anything is absurd. Hundreds of thousands or millions of innocent Americans can be added on a whim. They don't need any evidence that you are a bad guy to add you to a list.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/no-fly-no-gun-nonsense/article/2000194

In a speech so terrible that it left Politico wondering if Oval Office addresses should become a thing of the past, Obama proceeded to demagogue Republicans for not passing legislation preventing people on the "no-fly list" from buying guns. This proposal is a nonstarter and utterly unserious. For all of the mystique surrounding the list, it's little more than an assortment of people the government deems suspicious for any number of reasons. (It's also a misnomer—people on the list fly all the time but are subject to heightened scrutiny when they do.) Senator Ted Kennedy ended up on the list once, as did The Scrapbook's colleague Stephen F. Hayes (Steve had flown on a one-way ticket to Istanbul, to board a cruise ship that ended up in Athens).

[ABX]

Suspected terrorists should not be able to buy guns, period. Otherwise the list is completely pointless.

That the list can be corrupted is another issue entirely. That may be true, but it does not change my statement in the first paragraph.

You do realize that by being a member here, on FR and other similar sites, you are most likely on some sort of list somewhere. It isn't the list 'can' be corrupted, the list already is corrupted. It has been reported over and over (several links throughout the thread) that DHS has various groups like Tea Party members, vets, and gun owners on these type of watch lists.

One of our most important principles that separate us from other nations is the concept of Due Process. It makes the individual sovereign over the state and makes it very difficult to have rights removed from you. Those principles are what we need to stand for in the face of reactionary measures that in practice, will do nothing to actually make us safer. 

I know it is repeated often, but worth repeating again:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin

[ABX]

No.

stumpy is a traitor against the US Constitution.

It was actually a Hillary quote that was almost identical to Trump's statement. Just testing folks.

[geronl]

A Google search tells us that most Democrats want government to have this unconstitutional power.

Jeb Bush wanted it to a small extent (narrowed)
Sen. Ayotte wants it.
Kasich was for it.


No real surprise, since they are on the left.

[sitetest]

It was actually a Hillary quote that was almost identical to Trump's statement. Just testing folks.

Anyone who states that Americans should lose their constitutional rights because some  bureaucrat puts their name on a list is a traitor.  Whether hitlery,  stumpy, or anyone else.

[INVAR]

No where have I defined this as you assert.

Oh really? Here, let me requote you from above:

That is the target group, or it should be, for the kind of weapons ban we are talking about. Making a ban inclusive of persons under "reasonable suspicion" of "foreign" terror ties, and establishing strict guidelines for how the FBI would determine who fits in that category, is a more nuanced and effective way to limit the access such people have to heavy weaponry.

This thread is about the subject of blocking gun sales, gun bans on the type of weapon used in Orlando, semi-auto handguns and rifles.  You used the term 'heavy  weapons' in this discussion which is the same words and classification the Liberal Left gun control crowd applies when they are discussing plans to regulate arms to 'make us safe'.

What we are discussing is the degree of evidence that is reasonable to use as a tool for banning terrorists with foreign connections from having assault and other heavy weapons

What the hell is an 'assault' weapon? Define the classification and caliber of weapon that falls into the category of an 'assault' weapon.   

Define 'heavy weapons' for us.  You sound just like a stark-raving mad Marxist Gun Grabber for crying out loud!

For someone claiming to be Conservative, why are you using Leftist/Marxist definitions and nomenclature to describe arms as your cassus belli for prohibition of arms to certain classified people?

This in no way effect ordinary US citizens and their 2nd amendment rights

BULLPUCKEY!! It ALWAYS affects ordinary US Citizens and our inalienable right to keep and bear arms, ALWAYS.  Instead of talking about more bans and more restrictions of the criminals and terrorists who are not supposed to have weapons anyway - why are you and yours not talking about ARMING UP the American Citizen because it has been made self-evident that we are on our own when it comes to keeping ourselves safe?????

No, I simply understand the reality of politics and Mr. Trump's modus operandi

So you can read his mind and correct his misstatements and retranslate what Trump plainly says when he gaffes.  I'll assume you are on his payroll to spam the internet with Trump euphoria, and translate for us what Trump really means. 

You can do anything you'd like, but simply saying false things does not lend them credibility.

With who?  You?  Of course not.   It is mutual that you and your prince have absolutely no credibility with me  either.  But you might want to repeat that statement to yourself five times in a mirror before playing Apologist for your anointed.

He is far and away the closest thing you'll find in this election

NO - WRONG.  Darrell Castle is far and away the closest person now running to scrap the entire system of gun regulations, fully restore the intents of the 2nd Amendment and let the American people defend themselves.  Trump is not that person.

Never was. I know what his record is on guns.

[Mesaclone]

Oh really? Here, let me requote you from above: Where in that quote do I mention the specific firearm you mentioned?

This thread is about the subject of blocking gun sales, gun bans on the type of weapon used in Orlando, semi-auto handguns and rifles.  You used the term 'heavy  weapons' in this discussion which is the same words and classification the Liberal Left gun control crowd applies when they are discussing plans to regulate arms to 'make us safe'. Unlike myself, they are not referring to terrorists with foreign terror connections EXCLUSIVELY. That's not just a difference, its a chasm.


What the hell is an 'assault' weapon? Define the classification and caliber of weapon that falls into the category of an 'assault' weapon.   

Define 'heavy weapons' for us.  You sound just like a stark-raving mad Marxist Gun Grabber for crying out loud! Again, I would argue that a terror suspect with proven ties to foreign terror groups should have access to NO WEAPONS at all, much less the heavy weapons mentioned

For someone claiming to be Conservative, why are you using Leftist/Marxist definitions and nomenclature to describe arms as your cassus belli for prohibition of arms to certain classified people?No, you're just paranoid. I believe all non-terrorist citizens have a right to any firearm they wish...you will find no greater supporter of 2nd amendment rights than myself.

BULLPUCKEY!! It ALWAYS affects ordinary US Citizens and our inalienable right to keep and bear arms, ALWAYS.  Instead of talking about more bans and more restrictions of the criminals and terrorists who are not supposed to have weapons anyway - why are you and yours not talking about ARMING UP the American Citizen because it has been made self-evident that we are on our own when it comes to keeping ourselves safe?????I think an armed citizenry IS our best defense against terror, and I hope every American does as we do in Arizona...open and concealed carry fully legal. I myself carry and I wish everyone else did, though that's an individual's decision.

So you can read his mind and correct his misstatements and retranslate what Trump plainly says when he gaffes.  I'll assume you are on his payroll to spam the internet with Trump euphoria, and translate for us what Trump really means.  I understand his method and I understand the political environment in which he operates. Its doesn't take a Jedi mind trick to see what his intent is...just a smidgeon of objectivity.

With who?  You?  Of course not.   It is mutual that you and your prince have absolutely no credibility with me  either.  But you might want to repeat that statement to yourself five times in a mirror before playing Apologist for your anointed.Why would anyone care if you believed them to be credible...you are roiling in a sea of emotion, try substituting cooler intellect instead. Things might be clearer for you and then, perhaps, people like myself WILL care what you think and say.

NO - WRONG.  Darrell Castle is far and away the closest person now running to scrap the entire system of gun regulations, fully restore the intents of the 2nd Amendment and let the American people defend themselves.  Trump is not that person. I don't know who Darrell Castle is, but I can guarantee you that you have a better chance of being our next president than he does. So supporting him is a sad and futile act...but its a free country so you do as you must.

Never was. I know what his record is on guns.

Maybe be less of a drama queen if you actually want to make some valid points. Having the equivalent of a tantrum doesn't really impact anyone's thinking on these issues. Despite the polarization of most on the board, I suspect there are still some people working to decide who they will support. Your hysterics are not helping your own cause.

[HonestJohn]

Who gets to decide what makes someone suspected terrorist?

http://www.politico.com/story/2011/08/sources-biden-likened-tea-partiers-to-terrorists-060421

Wouldn't it be great if it was the same IRS office as the one that went after the TEA party groups?

 

[roamer_1]

You make a good point... but if these "suspected terrorists" keep getting guns and killing, we will get much worse legislation than a program preventing terror list members from getting guns.

LOL! No it won't. Give me a grand and drop me just about anywhere in the US that's populated, and I'll have a weapon in two days.
Hell, for that matter, all I need is a 2 car garage, reasonably stocked, a tooling lathe, and a flycutter, and I'll make my own.
All this list will do is take the right to purchase guns away from folks who prefer to keep the law. No criminal will give it a second thought.
And it won't stop him from getting anything he wants.

[INVAR]

Where in that quote do I mention the specific firearm you mentioned?

Why must you dissemble?  You were ASKED to define what constitutes an "assault weapon" - you were asked to DEFINE what constitutes "heavy weapons".

You refused to answer.  Instead you deflected, redirected and went back to a bogus point which is irrelevant to the questions you were asked.

Again, I would argue that a terror suspect with proven ties to foreign terror groups should have access to NO WEAPONS at all, much less the heavy weapons mentioned

What 'heavy weapons' mentioned??

Which ones?  Which "heavy weapons" did we mention?????

The AR-15s?  The Semi-automatic rifles?  The carbines?  The semi-auto Glocks?

Which of those is 'Heavy Weapons' according to you?

I believe all non-terrorist citizens have a right to any firearm they wish...you will find no greater supporter of 2nd amendment rights than myself.

I don't believe that for a second. Not with the kind of language you use. 

So tell us, what are these 'Assault weapons' and what are these 'Heavy Weapons' you elude to, that you don't want anyone on these 'lists' to be able to have access to?

Tell us what they are, you Great Supporter of the Second Amendment…..

I myself carry and I wish everyone else did, though that's an individual's decision

Would that be an "assault weapon" you carry, or a "Heavy weapon" you carry there in AZ?  What caliber would your Heavy Weapon fire?  Centerfire or rimfire?

Its doesn't take a Jedi mind trick to see what his intent is...just a smidgeon of objectivity.

That's why political scientists can't get a handle on him and why even Limbaugh has to run around and move the goal posts to make him look less like a human gaffe machine and somewhat credible on the imbecillic positions and statements he makes. 

I guess it takes an acolyte to read Trump's mind and know his intents so you can translate what he really means for all of us.

Things might be clearer for you and then, perhaps, people like myself WILL care what you think and say.

I really don't care what anyone thinks.  I've enough experience with Leftists/liberals and Mob Zombies to know that the only time someone can be reasonable or intelligent is if you agree with them.  I prefer to be unreasonable and considered unintelligent by such people.

I don't know who Darrell Castle is, but I can guarantee you that you have a better chance of being our next president than he does.

Well, I'm not running so you are already wrong on that score.

So supporting him is a sad and futile act...but its a free country so you do as you must.

I didn't realize I required your permission. 

Look, I don't care if you think it's futile.  I have God to answer to for my actions.  Voting for anyone who does not share my principles is a sin to me.

Trump and Hillary are both antithetical to my principles.  So my vote will always go to a biblical Christian Conservative, even if I have to write someone in.

Maybe be less of a drama queen if you actually want to make some valid points.

No point I will ever make will be considered valid by you 'Teach'.  Not unless we agree with you.  See, that's how it works with you people. 

We are drama queens, irrational, not serious, invalid, babies, tantrum throwers, childish and the other assorted litany of derrogatories you and your pals fling about because we will not support your prince.

Same technique the Liberal Left uses to great effect BTW.

Interesting how easily you adapted it for your own use.

Having the equivalent of a tantrum doesn't really impact anyone's thinking on these issues.

Says the person throwing a tantrum every time you read something negative about your prince that you have to jump in and re-translate for everyone because we're too stupid to recognize that what Trump said doesn't mean what the plain words he spoke mean.

Your hysterics are not helping your own cause.

And your condescension, insults and ridicule is??????? 

That's funny right there.

You might suggest that same advice to your prince.  I don't think his hysterics are helping his cause.

[Mesaclone]

Why must you dissemble?  You were ASKED to define what constitutes an "assault weapon" - you were asked to DEFINE what constitutes "heavy weapons". I did answer, I said they should not have access to ANY firearms. That would include light AND heavy weaponry.

You refused to answer.  Instead you deflected, redirected and went back to a bogus point which is irrelevant to the questions you were asked.

What 'heavy weapons' mentioned??

Which ones?  Which "heavy weapons" did we mention?????

The AR-15s?  The Semi-automatic rifles?  The carbines?  The semi-auto Glocks?

Which of those is 'Heavy Weapons' according to you?

I don't believe that for a second. Not with the kind of language you use.  I have no control over what you believe

So tell us, what are these 'Assault weapons' and what are these 'Heavy Weapons' you elude to, that you don't want anyone on these 'lists' to be able to have access to?

Tell us what they are, you Great Supporter of the Second Amendment…..

Would that be an "assault weapon" you carry, or a "Heavy weapon" you carry there in AZ?  What caliber would your Heavy Weapon fire?  Centerfire or rimfire?I carry a .45 if you must know.

That's why political scientists can't get a handle on him and why even Limbaugh has to run around and move the goal posts to make him look less like a human gaffe machine and somewhat credible on the imbecillic positions and statements he makes. 

I guess it takes an acolyte to read Trump's mind and know his intents so you can translate what he really means for all of us. No just common sense and a basic understanding of politics....and a touch of impartiality.

I really don't care what anyone thinks.  I've enough experience with Leftists/liberals and Mob Zombies to know that the only time someone can be reasonable or intelligent is if you agree with them.  I prefer to be unreasonable and considered unintelligent by such people.If so, you've achieved your purpose.

Well, I'm not running so you are already wrong on that score.Darn.

I didn't realize I required your permission.  You don't but I consent nonetheless.

Look, I don't care if you think it's futile.  I have God to answer to for my actions.  Voting for anyone who does not share my principles is a sin to me. God isn't at fault here, this is about your decision making process.

Trump and Hillary are both antithetical to my principles.  So my vote will always go to a biblical Christian Conservative, even if I have to write someone in.Your vote will either facilitate Hillary...a far more anti-Christian impact on our daily lives...or it will facilitate Mr. Trump, by any measure a far more benign impact on the same. What your vote won't do is help anyone but those two attain the White House.

No point I will ever make will be considered valid by you 'Teach'.  Not unless we agree with you.  See, that's how it works with you people.  Au Contraire, Bill Martin here makes great points all the time on the anti-Trump side...rational, coherent, even decent in his presentation of his ideas. So much so that I've re-evaluated many of my own thoughts on the race.

We are drama queens, irrational, not serious, invalid, babies, tantrum throwers, childish and the other assorted litany of derrogatories you and your pals fling about because we will not support your prince. Those terms are not "slung" because of who you support, its because of the way in which you present your arguments.

Same technique the Liberal Left uses to great effect BTW. Whatever "technique" you are referring to, all techniques in this frame of reference are used by both sides to make their case. All I've done is explained Mr. Trump's positions as I see them, perfectly reasonable approach to a discussion thereof

Interesting how easily you adapted it for your own use.Try not to go all "aluminum foil" if you can avoid it.


Says the person throwing a tantrum every time you read something negative about your prince that you have to jump in and re-translate for everyone because we're too stupid to recognize that what Trump said doesn't mean what the plain words he spoke mean.

And your condescension, insults and ridicule is??????? In your imagination...or was that a rhetorical question?

That's funny right there.

You might suggest that same advice to your prince.  I don't think his hysterics are helping his cause. I'll tell him next time he calls.

Next

[RoosGirl]

Wouldn't it be great if it was the same IRS office as the one that went after the TEA party groups?

 

Makes sense to streamline the process and make things more efficient.

[INVAR]

You were ASKED to define what constitutes an "assault weapon" - you were asked to DEFINE what constitutes "heavy weapons".

I did answer, I said they should not have access to ANY firearms. That would include light AND heavy weaponry.

That was NOT the question.  You DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION. 

TELL US WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF  'LIGHT WEAPONRY'.   What specific arms does this include?

TELL US WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF 'ASSAULT WEAPON'.  What specific arms does this include?

TELL US WHAT IS YOUR DEFINTION OF 'HEAVY WEAPONRY'.  What specific arms does this include?

If you cannot answer these questions, because of your use of liberal-Left language and talking points in regards to arms, I submit you are no supporter of the Second Amendment.  I will suspect you are just another Liberal-Leftist gun grabber in sheep's clothing .

God isn't at fault here, this is about your decision making process.

I did not say anything about God being at fault for anything.  I said voting for Trump was a sin according to my understanding of scripture, my faith, and according to my principles.

Your vote will either facilitate Hillary...a far more anti-Christian impact on our daily lives...or it will facilitate Mr. Trump, by any measure a far more benign impact on the same.

No.  I don't subscribe to that false paradigm anymore.  Both are are antithetical to my faith and principles and I am absolved from the fact this people want a king/dictator to rule them.

What your vote won't do is help anyone but those two attain the White House.

You keep telling yourself that.  But it is irrelevant to me.  I will have no hand in casting a vote for either antithetical candidate.

Those terms are not "slung" because of who you support, its because of the way in which you present your arguments.

Just like a liberal, screw substance - worry about the 'tone'.  I've watched plenty of decent, fair and thoughtful individuals get insulted, threatened, ridiculed and banned from myriad fora simply because they refused to genuflect your prince.  I'm done playing footsie with bullies.  You guys and your candidate wanted an internecine war that your guy and your fellows started, well you got one.

Try not to go all "aluminum foil" if you can avoid it.

Maybe you should take lessons from Bill Martin.


'"condescension, insults and ridicule.."

In your imagination...or was that a rhetorical question?

I don't know, I'll go check my tinfoil.

I'll tell him next time he calls.

Or you can call him.  The number might be on your pay stub.

[Mesaclone]

You were ASKED to define what constitutes an "assault weapon" - you were asked to DEFINE what constitutes "heavy weapons".

That was NOT the question.  You DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION. 

TELL US WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF  'LIGHT WEAPONRY'.   What specific arms does this include?

TELL US WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF 'ASSAULT WEAPON'.  What specific arms does this include?

TELL US WHAT IS YOUR DEFINTION OF 'HEAVY WEAPONRY'.  What specific arms does this include?

If you cannot answer these questions, because of your use of liberal-Left language and talking points in regards to arms, I submit you are no supporter of the Second Amendment.  I will suspect you are just another Liberal-Leftist gun grabber in sheep's clothing .

I did not say anything about God being at fault for anything.  I said voting for Trump was a sin according to my understanding of scripture, my faith, and according to my principles.

No.  I don't subscribe to that false paradigm anymore.  Both are are antithetical to my faith and principles and I am absolved from the fact this people want a king/dictator to rule them.

You keep telling yourself that.  But it is irrelevant to me.  I will have no hand in casting a vote for either antithetical candidate.

Just like a liberal, screw substance - worry about the 'tone'.  I've watched plenty of decent, fair and thoughtful individuals get insulted, threatened, ridiculed and banned from myriad fora simply because they refused to genuflect your prince.  I'm done playing footsie with bullies.  You guys and your candidate wanted an internecine war that your guy and your fellows started, well you got one.

Maybe you should take lessons from Bill Martin.


'"condescension, insults and ridicule.."
I don't know, I'll go check my tinfoil.

Or you can call him.  The number might be on your pay stub.

Why would I define for you what is and is not an assault weapon, when I have said all weapons should be banned from terrorists with foreign connections? Any related legislation have no need to define what is and is not in that category. I can assure, having served 10 years in the army, I know full well what I consider to be "assault" weapons...those items that fire multiple rounds with a single trigger squeeze. But that's irrelevant, as I'm not in favor of restricting anyone from having such weapons. Frankly, I could care less if you think my position on terrorists (ISIS and AQI types) being banned from weapon ownership indicates liberalism...its ludicrous...but think what you will.

And if you think voting for Trump is a sin, you've left all reason and coherency WAY behind. We're not voting for a Pontifex Maximus or a Pope, we are voting for the secular leader of our nation. But, as nobody is ever reasoned out of religious absolutism, I will not try to do so with you...fanaticism has taken over where logic and common sense should be the ruling factors.

But here's the whopper. You stated " I've watched plenty of decent, fair and thoughtful individuals get insulted, threatened, ridiculed and banned...". You must be kidding, as you have just defined the tone and tactics of the vast majority of NeverTrumpr's here on this site. Look in the mirror, and look hard. Its been a months long cascade of anger, insults...calling Trump supporters Nazis and Brownshirts being my favorites...and general juvenile behavior directed at people simply trying to have reasoned discussions.

[RoosGirl]

Heavy weapon

[INVAR]

Why would I define for you what is and is not an assault weapon, when I have said all weapons should be banned from terrorists with foreign connections?

Because you USED the terms "Assault weapons", "Light weaponry" and "Heavy Weapons" in the context of lists of prohibited weapons.

Yes, we know you keep deferring to your default position that you don't want any weapons in the hands of suspected terrorists but we all know and understand that ANY list of banned "weapons" will be USED to prohibit American citizens from keeping and bearing such weapons.

So I wanted you to define for us what constitutes "assault weapons", "Light weaponry" and "heavy weapons:" since YOU USED THOSE LIBERAL TALKING POINT IDENTIFIERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH GUN LIST PROHIBITIONS.

I can assure, having served 10 years in the army, I know full well what I consider to be "assault" weapons...those items that fire multiple rounds with a single trigger squeeze.

I don't believe for a second you served in any branch of the military.  No one I know that served refers to a semi-auto rifle or handgun as an 'assault weapon'.  ALL WEAPONS ARE ASSAULT WEAPONS.

You speak and define terms EXACTLY as the liberal gun-grabbing Leftists define an "assault weapon". 

But that's irrelevant, as I'm not in favor of restricting anyone from having such weapons.

NO, IT'S NOT IRRELEVANT just because you say so.  ANY list that bans any weapon is a list that will be used to prohibit American citizens their right to keep and bear listed weapons.

I could care less if you think my position on terrorists (ISIS and AQI types) being banned from weapon ownership indicates liberalism...its ludicrous…

You use the same exact language and identifiers that the Gun-grabbing morons in the Marxist Left use in this discussion about bans and lists.  If it walks and squawks like a liberal…...

And if you think voting for Trump is a sin, you've left all reason and coherency WAY behind.

And here you lecture us about 'reasonableness' and tone while you insult my faith and my principles.  No matter.  Scripture tells us that the 'wise' of this world consider God's ways foolish (1 Corinthians 3:19-20). Thanks for demonstrating that for all of us.

We're not voting for a Pontifex Maximus or a Pope, we are voting for the secular leader of our nation.

Keep telling yourself that as you keep voting for more heinous, wicked and morally devoid power-mad individuals who desire to rule and subjugate according to their own morality, passions and whims.

But, as nobody is ever reasoned out of religious absolutism, I will not try to do so with you…

As if your worldly 'reason' would ever persuade me to abandon my faith or principles.

fanaticism has taken over where logic and common sense should be the ruling factors.

Another projection on your party - but if you think my Christianity is 'fanatical' you join the chorus of millions of secular hedonist Leftists who think and have said the same exact thing.

No wonder Trump is so appealing to you.

You must be kidding, as you have just defined the tone and tactics of the vast majority of NeverTrumpr's here on this site.

Projection yet again.  I know of several former Conservative forums and countless social media groups that your pro-Trump ilk have taken over and either purged, banned or ran out non-Trump Conservatives from membership/participation with the most vile, despotic and vehement rhetoric and mob tactics I have ever seen.  You and yours demand an echo chamber, and when you do not have it - you do here what you do there.  Scream and cry 'foul!' and work to get the owners and staff to ban or remove those who disagree with you.

Its been a months long cascade of anger, insults...calling Trump supporters Nazis and Brownshirts being my favorites...and general juvenile behavior directed at people simply trying to have reasoned discussions.

As I said earlier, your prince and his mob of fanatics started this internecine war.  Of course the death threats and calls of treason bandied about by your faithful upon those of us who have openly stated we are not voting for your prince, are much more in line with Nazis and Brownshirt tactics.

But you will keep projecting.  It's what works for political warfare operatives.

[Mesaclone]

Because you USED the terms "Assault weapons", "Light weaponry" and "Heavy Weapons" in the context of lists of prohibited weapons.

Yes, we know you keep deferring to your default position that you don't want any weapons in the hands of suspected terrorists but we all know and understand that ANY list of banned "weapons" will be USED to prohibit American citizens from keeping and bearing such weapons.First, I oppose any ban of such weapons from US citizens not suspected of foreign inspired terrorism...so your "understanding" is just plain wrong.

So I wanted you to define for us what constitutes "assault weapons", "Light weaponry" and "heavy weapons:" since YOU USED THOSE LIBERAL TALKING POINT IDENTIFIERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH GUN LIST PROHIBITIONS. Those are identifiers and use of them stems from military service, and has nothing to do with your silly claim of "liberal talking points". In my context, assault weapons are M16's, SAW's and other similar weapons...heavy stuff would M60's and .50 cals. along with some kinds of small explosive ordinances. Light weapons are basically 9 mils and .45's. Not sure why military terminology passes for liberal talking points in your world, but then again your world is a bit...off.

I don't believe for a second you served in any branch of the military.  No one I know that served refers to a semi-auto rifle or handgun as an 'assault weapon'.  ALL WEAPONS ARE ASSAULT WEAPONS. Lets see. Basic training at Fort Bliss, 5 years in Budingen, FRG...ever heard of Hanau or Gelnhausen, I have because I lived in both during my tour. Served in 3/61 ADA as a Stinger crewman. Served in the Gulf war with 3rd Armored Division, 1st Bde...one of multiple tours in Iraq and Kuwait FYI. Commissioned in 1994 after going Green to Gold and assigned at Ft Carson followed by a stint in Ft Polk. Glad to tell you all about Leesville and Deridder down there if you'd like to quiz me. But the bigger point, you're an idiot for questioning my service...I'll be glad to give someone like Align or RIV my personal information so they can research everything I've said here. I'll do so the second your willing to put a 1000 dollars...as I will...in their hands. If I'm lying, you get the money. If I'm not, I keep your cash....deal?

You speak and define terms EXACTLY as the liberal gun-grabbing Leftists define an "assault weapon".  Only to someone who is a paranoid and unthinking fool...I define weapons terms based on my past military experience.


NO, IT'S NOT IRRELEVANT just because you say so.  ANY list that bans any weapon is a list that will be used to prohibit American citizens their right to keep and bear listed weapons.Felons are banned, does that mean we're doomed? Of course not, but your too paranoid to see it.

You use the same exact language and identifiers that the Gun-grabbing morons in the Marxist Left use in this discussion about bans and lists.  If it walks and squawks like a liberal…...Sadly, you don't know the difference...which explains to some extent why you're a NeverTrumpr.

And here you lecture us about 'reasonableness' and tone while you insult my faith and my principles.  No matter.  Scripture tells us that the 'wise' of this world consider God's ways foolish (1 Corinthians 3:19-20). Thanks for demonstrating that for all of us.I don't consider God's ways foolish, I just seem to understand them better than you do. You use the idea of god as a political bludgeon or a litmus test to judge others. That's as far from godly as you get. My idea is to let everyone take the path the best leads them to God in their own way.

Keep telling yourself that as you keep voting for more heinous, wicked and morally devoid power-mad individuals who desire to rule and subjugate according to their own morality, passions and whims. I'm not voting for Hillary.

As if your worldly 'reason' would ever persuade me to abandon my faith or principles. True, you can't open a closed mind with reason.

Another projection on your party - but if you think my Christianity is 'fanatical' you join the chorus of millions of secular hedonist Leftists who think and have said the same exact thing. While being a Secular Hedonist sounds kinda fun, I'm just your basic, boring father of 3 girls and a working guy....just not a lot of hedonism going on.

No wonder Trump is so appealing to you. He is, just not for any of the reasons you list.

Projection yet again.  I know of several former Conservative forums and countless social media groups that your pro-Trump ilk have taken over and either purged, banned or ran out non-Trump Conservatives from membership/participation with the most vile, despotic and vehement rhetoric and mob tactics I have ever seen.  You and yours demand an echo chamber, and when you do not have it - you do here what you do there.  Scream and cry 'foul!' and work to get the owners and staff to ban or remove those who disagree with you. Lets just leave it at eye of the beholder, but be careful...your victim card is showing.


As I said earlier, your prince and his mob of fanatics started this internecine war.  Of course the death threats and calls of treason bandied about by your faithful upon those of us who have openly stated we are not voting for your prince, are much more in line with Nazis and Brownshirt tactics.

But you will keep projecting.  It's what works for political warfare operatives.

Don't let those crown jewels slip out of your maidenly hands, Mrs. Drama.

[kjam22]

We don't need gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists.   If they are a suspected terrorist, round them up and send them to Guantanamo until they learn to quit posting "I Love ISIS" on social media.

[geronl]

We don't need gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists.   If they are a suspected terrorist, round them up and send them to Guantanamo until they learn to quit posting "I Love ISIS" on social media.

Posting stupid things on social media is terrorism... hhmmmm

[INVAR]

In my context, assault weapons are M16's, SAW's and other similar weapons...heavy stuff would M60's and .50 cals. along with some kinds of small explosive ordinances. Light weapons are basically 9 mils and .45's. Not sure why military terminology passes for liberal talking points in your world, but then again your world is a bit...off.

Now we finally come to it.  So… in your lexicon, M-16s, SAWs and other "similar weapons" are "assault weapons". 

Let's review your comment that spurned my question to begin with:

Quote from: Mesaclone on Today at 10:04:17 AM
That is the target group, or it should be, for the kind of weapons ban we are talking about. Making a ban inclusive of persons under "reasonable suspicion" of "foreign" terror ties, and establishing strict guidelines for how the FBI would determine who fits in that category, is a more nuanced and effective way to limit the access such people have to heavy weaponry.


First of all, the FBI, BATFE and DHS already have stringent "guidelines" and limiting policies of "assault weapons" that ALREADY limits access for any citizen regardless of whether or not they are a good citizen or not.

Let's start with your "assault weapons" classification above in the context of making a ban 'inclusive of persons under reasonable suspicion'. 

Can your average American walk into your average gun store and purchase an M-16, an M249 or any 'similar weapons'??

Answer NO.  Specifically, no citizen can legally purchase an M249.  Period.   As to an M-16, the only one they could purchase is one manufactured before May 19, 1986 and it will cost an average citizen $200 for the tax stamp from Treasury, $12-$14,000 for the transfer and weapon from a Class III dealer, Form 4 submission to the BATFE and at least an 8 month waiting period for background check review.

Let's proceed with Heavy Weapons. 

M-60's and .50s? Most HWPs I recall used crew-based weapons, mortars, anti-tank platforms and HMGs.  Again, with the .50s and M-60s - purchasing such weapons falls into the limits posted above for your classification of "assault weapons".  It is not possible for a citizen to pay for and walk home with a TOW antitank weapon or artillery.

Both categories you listed and the weaponry accompaniments are not weapons your average Joe Six Pack is going to be able to acquire even legally, so the whole concept of these 'lists" to "limit access" is stupid, because the actual target of these limits and bans are the civilian offshoots of the M-16 which are all semi-auto carbines and rifles like the AR-15 and the AK-47 variants.

Besides, terrorists will not be deterred by any 'lists' and 'bans' of weapons that they can and will obtain by means upon which are outside the scope government regulation entails.

Any 'list' at this point is going to be targeting American citizens and banning their right to arms.  Advocating such a thing will impact our right to keep and bear and disarming us in the face of this enemy is as stupid as demanding all citizens commit suicide.

Get rid of every ban, restriction and limit on law abiding citizens and let us defend ourselves.

Lets see. Basic training at Fort Bliss, 5 years in Budingen, FRG...ever heard of Hanau or Gelnhausen, I have because I lived in both during my tour. Served in 3/61 ADA as a Stinger crewman. Served in the Gulf war with 3rd Armored Division, 1st Bde...one of multiple tours in Iraq and Kuwait FYI. Commissioned in 1994 after going Green to Gold and assigned at Ft Carson followed by a stint in Ft Polk. Glad to tell you all about Leesville and Deridder down there if you'd like to quiz me. But the bigger point, you're an idiot for questioning my service...I'll be glad to give someone like Align or RIV my personal information so they can research everything I've said here.

I am happy to stand corrected if indeed what you state is true.  Please accept my apologies for my ignorance of your service.

That said, you are indeed the very first person with a military background I have ever read that refers to the use of the term "assault weapons" when referencing the kinds of weapons used in Orlando and available to Joe Sixpack. 

I really shouldn't be surprised though.  There's plenty of ex-mil and current enlisted who voted for Obama and who are planning to vote for Hildabeast.  I guess it's folks from my class and age group that don't use that term.  I'm not comfortable with using such terminology for referencing the kinds of semi-automatic weapons most Americans possess as "assault' or "heavy weapons".

I don't consider God's ways foolish, I just seem to understand them better than you do.

Perhaps.   

As a pastor and missionary, I'm always up for being shown what things I have to repent of and change my understanding about when it comes to His Word and living what I'm called to.

Once I have proven what I do understand however, I am immovable from watering it down or abandoning it for expedience.  So principles and biblical understanding that I have nailed down from study and experience is not something I am ever going to trade or surrender.

You use the idea of god as a political bludgeon or a litmus test to judge others.

1Corinthians 6:2-3 and Matthew 7:16 comes firmly to mind.  Interesting that when I say that I consider voting for Trump is a sin to me, that you automatically assert that I'm using God as a political bludgeon and judging your standing before the Lord.    Reminds me of the same kind of accusatory reaction I get when I refuse to marry homosexuals or divorced folks who cheated on their former spouses.  Because I won't do it - somehow they feel JUDGED.

A little conscience conviction goes a long way towards eternal life.  So all the vitriol I get is more than worth it.

That's as far from godly as you get. My idea is to let everyone take the path the best leads them to God in their own way.

So you assert you understand God's Ways better than I do, yet you make a statement such at that?

I think the Jihadist in Orlando thinks he took the path that best led him to god in his own way.

Interesting you think that everyone should follow their own path that leads them to God.  Scripture is replete with examples of what happens to nations where everyone decided to do what was right in their own eyes.  The bible clearly tells us not to lean on our own understanding, and that there is only ONE path to reconciliation with The Father.

But then you said you understand God's ways better than I do.

I simply live by Psalm 146:3 and use Jeremiah 9:4-5 as a methodology to everything I encounter.

[markomalley]

Here is the problem, and it is right in line with similar proposals for those on no fly lists.

Being a suspect is not being charged nor is it being convicted so there is zero basis for the removal of that right. It just means some government bureaucrat thinks, based on the random criteria of the day, that you are a suspect to be investigated.

Remember, DHS has been reported to have high on 'suspect lists' for domestic terrorists people who are members of Tea Party groups, militias, veterans, and even just being a gun owner can make you suspect to them.

http://www.teaparty.org/dhs-brands-gun-owners-are-terrorists-18853/

Always watch out for knee jerk political actions after events like this that strip liberty in mass.

Exactly the point.