GOP cares more about NRA than closing 'terrorist loophole'

[GMDino]

(11-23-2015, 06:20 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Stronger and more strict immigration rules are what's needed.   Changing a loophole isn't fixing the problem.  There is no loophole if we track immigrants, students, and tourists.   Then when they run out of time they are removed.

The loophole says that even if you are on the terror watch list you can legally buy a weapon in the US.

That has ZERO to do with out immigration policies.  Nil.  Nada.  Nothing.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-24-2015, 12:25 AM)GMDino Wrote: The loophole says that even if you are on the terror watch list you can legally buy a weapon in the US.

That has ZERO to do with out immigration policies.  Nil.  Nada.  Nothing.

Oh quit being so afraid.  The odds that a few terrorists who get weapons use them on you are 
nil nada nothing.

[*Nately120*]

What's the point? Aren't terrorists just going to get all those illegal firearms everyone else who doesn't want to follow the law gets?

[*michaelsean*]

(11-24-2015, 12:50 AM)Nately120 Wrote: What's the point?  Aren't terrorists just going to get all those illegal firearms everyone else who doesn't want to follow the law gets?

You think some gun show guy is going to sell to an A-rab?

[*Nately120*]

(11-24-2015, 12:56 AM)michaelsean Wrote: You think some gun show guy is going to sell to an A-rab?

You think the guy who won't sell to an A-rab is the one arming every black thug in this country?

[StLucieBengal]

(11-24-2015, 12:25 AM)GMDino Wrote: The loophole says that even if you are on the terror watch list you can legally buy a weapon in the US.

That has ZERO to do with out immigration policies.  Nil.  Nada.  Nothing.

So terror watch list people are all u.s. citizens?

[GMDino]

(11-24-2015, 01:57 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So terror watch list people are all u.s. citizens?

Nope.  Go read.

[GMDino]

(11-24-2015, 12:44 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh quit being so afraid.  The odds that a few terrorists who get weapons use them on you are 
nil nada nothing.

So if we have a list of child molesters you want them teaching kindergarten?  Versus a list of people who want to be teachers and get vetted before ever getting a chance at the job?

See the difference?

No...you don't because you are still hung up on knowing you bought into the fear.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-24-2015, 09:03 AM)GMDino Wrote: So if we have a list of child molesters you want them teaching kindergarten?  Versus a list of people who want to be teachers and get vetted before ever getting a chance at the job?

See the difference?

No...you don't because you are still hung up on knowing you bought into the fear.

Oh these are terrorists.  How come we haven't arrested them?

[GMDino]

(11-24-2015, 11:31 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh these are terrorists.  How come we haven't arrested them?

Now you're just avoiding the question. (But I should have said "accused" child molesters.)

But hey if you want people who made it onto the watch list to be able to buy guns like you and me that's great.  Just also stop pretending that grandma and her son the refugees are a greater threat to America.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-24-2015, 11:42 AM)GMDino Wrote: Now you're just avoiding the question. (But I should have said "accused" child molesters.)

But hey if you want people who made it onto the watch list to be able to buy guns like you and me that's great.  Just also stop pretending that grandma and her son the refugees are a greater threat to America.

Thanks Barack.  Just grandma's and orphans and three legged dogs.  I haven't opined on this situation as I don't know enough about it, and Reid is a blatant liar so I'm not taking his word for it.  

[Benton]

(11-24-2015, 09:03 AM)GMDino Wrote: So if we have a list of child molesters you want them teaching kindergarten?  Versus a list of people who want to be teachers and get vetted before ever getting a chance at the job?

See the difference?

No...you don't because you are still hung up on knowing you bought into the fear.

Well, that's not exactly the same.

A background check before buying firearms is required in most purchases. It should be required in all, but that's besides the point. Thing is, that's the vetting process.

Your example is more like:
So if we have a list of child molesters you want them teaching kindergarten?  Versus a list of people who have been accused of knowing someone who may possibly be linked to pedophilia and get left on the list for years because there's not really any proof if they are or aren't before ever getting a chance at the job?

[GMDino]

(11-24-2015, 11:46 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Thanks Barack.  Just grandma's and orphans and three legged dogs.  I haven't opined on this situation as I don't know enough about it, and Reid is a blatant liar so I'm not taking his word for it.  

Then why are you arguing?

Because you believe Reid is liar?

[fredtoast]

(11-24-2015, 11:50 AM)Benton Wrote: Your example is more like:
So if we have a list of child molesters you want them teaching kindergarten?  Versus a list of people who have been accused of knowing someone who may possibly be linked to pedophilia and get left on the list for years because there's not really any proof if they are or aren't before ever getting a chance at the job?

The terror watch list is not just based on distant connections to terrorism.  There is often evidence that they are working with or supporting terrorists.  The information is just confidential for national security reasons.  Just look at all the terror threats we have thwarted because we had good evidence about who was involved and who to keep an eye on.  Remember all the flack about how we did not watch the Boston Marathon bombers even though there was some evidence that were connected to terror activity?  These people are out there, there may not be enough evidence to go arrest them, but that does not mean that they should not be under extra scrutiny.

Plus I would never have left my child alone with Michael Jackson, and he was never convicted of child molestation.

[Benton]

(11-24-2015, 12:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The terror watch list is not just based on distant connections to terrorism.  There is often evidence that they are working with or supporting terrorists.  The information is just confidential for national security reasons.  Just look at all the terror threats we have thwarted because we had good evidence about who was involved and who to keep an eye on.  Remember all the flack about how we did not watch the Boston Marathon bombers even though there was some evidence that were connected to terror activity?  These people are out there, there may not be enough evidence to go arrest them, but that does not mean that they should not be under extra scrutiny.

Plus I would never have left my child alone with Michael Jackson, and he was never convicted of child molestation.

I'm in favor of the lists. And I'm in favor of checking into — even surveillance of — people on those lists.

For more than a decade, my biggest criticism of 9/11 and what we did after (militarily invading Iraq to find al Qaeda) was that we didn't use/listen to our intelligence community. We have one of the biggest, most effective networks in the world and it operates at a fraction of the cost (both in dollars and lives) as the military... but we weren't really interested in using it.

I'm in favor of the lists, but I'm not in favor of denying anyone their rights just for being on them. If there's a reason to withhold their rights, arrest them and give them their day in court.

[Rotobeast]

(11-24-2015, 02:00 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm in favor of the lists, but I'm not in favor of denying anyone their rights just for being on them. If there's a reason to withhold their rights, arrest them and give them their day in court.

Thank you for being one of the few who supports The Constitution.