ban the fucking guns

[PhDeac]

Exactly. Adding stakes to the no fly list creates more urgency to fix it and add due process.

 

[Strickland33]

I don't really get this line of thinking. The no-fly list (at least as currently maintained) is troubling. There is nothing troubling to me about tacking no-buy on there as well.

Restricting access to guns for people on the no-fly list doesn't make it any more urgent to fix the no-fly list.

The proposal is a win-win for democrats. If it passes then Republicans will get on board to fix the no-fly list and if it doesn't (as was the case) Republicans get shit for being unwilling to do anything on gun control.

Who is giving the shit that Republicans (and some prominent Democrats) get? And do they care? It would be one thing if they cared. If they don't, then all of the Jon Olivers and Samantha Bees, petitions and press conferences, and op eds in the world don't mean anything.

 

[scooter84]

handguns are the real problem

I agree with this.

 

[Strickland33]

Exactly. Adding stakes to the no fly list creates more urgency to fix it and add due process.

How so?

Most people on the no fly list lack the political power to mobilize for the purpose of changing flaws in the no fly lost policy. It's the reason that no progress has been made on a really troubling issue for awhile now.

Short of optimism, what makes you think that this proposed legislation will reform a troubled institution that has been pretty impervious to reform for a long time?

 

[RChildress107]

Who is giving the shit that Republicans (and some prominent Democrats) get? And do they care? It would be one thing if they cared. If they don't, then all of the Jon Olivers and Samantha Bees, petitions and press conferences, and op eds in the world don't mean anything.

The real question is whether their constituents care? The answer is not enough, but hopefully enough to flip some seats and start moving the needle on gun control

 

[RJKarl]

No fly, no buy encourages racial profiling and discourages due process. Do not want.

Actually, it does the opposite. Due to getting a hearing in front of a judge and full rights, the government is less likely to racially profile. This holds them accountable. As it is today, we know nothing of what they are doing.

Given America's love of guns, are you going to want to have your record made public if you are racially profiling people? One of the best ways to prove profiling is to show how Agent X does his job. If Agent X exclusively or nearly exclusively picks innocent people of a race or religion, he's much more likely to get caught under that amendment than if he's operating in the dark.

 

[RChildress107]

How so?

Most people on the no fly list lack the political power to mobilize for the purpose of changing flaws in the no fly lost policy. It's the reason that no progress has been made on a really troubling issue for awhile now.

Short of optimism, what makes you think that this proposed legislation will reform a troubled institution that has been pretty impervious to reform for a long time?

Because if republicans agreed to pass it they would only do so with increased due process protections for those on the list.

Can't remember which republican amendment had the no-fly, no-buy but FBI has to show probable cause within 72 hours, but Dems should have agreed to that if the same due process requirement was added for those on the list who were denied access to a flight.

 

[RJKarl]

Because if republicans agreed to pass it they would only do so with increased due process protections for those on the list.

Can't remember which republican amendment had the no-fly, no-buy but FBI has to show probable cause within 72 hours, but Dems should have agreed to that if the same due process requirement was added for those on the list who were denied access to a flight.

The standards set in the GOP bill were impossible to meet in 72 hours. Effectively, it was a poison pill. The due process in the Dem bill was actual due process.

 

[RChildress107]

The standards set in the GOP bill were impossible to meet in 72 hours. Effectively, it was a poison pill. The due process in the Dem bill was actual due process.

Agreed. But asking republicans to expand that bogus requirement to the "no-fly" part of the no-fly no-buy list highlights how bogus it is.

 

[PhDeac]

Because if republicans agreed to pass it they would only do so with increased due process protections for those on the list.

Can't remember which republican amendment had the no-fly, no-buy but FBI has to show probable cause within 72 hours, but Dems should have agreed to that if the same due process requirement was added for those on the list who were denied access to a flight.

Susan Collins. Seems like a reasonable amendment.

 

[MysteryMen]

Low capacity semi-auto makes sense to me as a personal protection feature, especially because even after we ban them, the bad guys have a century's worth of black market high capacity weapons in the market.

What percentage of guns sold actually get used for self-defense? 1 in 100,000? 1 in 1,000,000?? Does anyone know?

 

[RJKarl]

Plus, if you can't hit thed guy with 12-15 shots, what makes you think having more will help?

Also, if what makes you think in the time from #16-30, you'd kill him before he killed you?

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

No shit. People who support gun control are trying to do whatever little they can that would get past the paranoid gun nuts. Mass shootings get far more news coverage than everyday gun violence so that's why gun control advocates try to get momentum for sensible measures when they happen.

If only we had a recent example of one side pushing through a complete overhaul of an entire national industry despite unprecedented protests from a large segment (maybe even the majority) of the population and numerous constitutional challenges by the opposition. But clearly, their hands are tied.

Both sides are equally to blame on this debacle. Republicans for not listening to reason and Dems for pissing away their political capital on the shitastic program that caused this federal logjam and the current divide.

 

[jhmd2000]

What percentage of guns sold actually get used for self-defense? 1 in 100,000? 1 in 1,000,000?? Does anyone know?

Ideally as few as possible.

 

[RJKarl]

If only we had a recent example of one side pushing through a complete overhaul of an entire national industry despite unprecedented protests from a large segment (maybe even the majority) of the population and numerous constitutional challenges by the opposition. But clearly, their hands are tied.

Both sides are equally to blame on this debacle. Republicans for not listening to reason and Dems for pissing away their political capital on the shitastic program that caused this federal logjam and the current divide.

This is utter crap!

What the Dems are proposing will, in no way, be a "complete overhaul of an entire national industry". To say universal background checks and "no fly- no buy" would do this is one of the most ignorant, brainwashed, disingenuous posts ever on this board.

 

[RChildress107]

Both sides are equally to blame on this debacle. Republicans for not listening to reason and Dems for pissing away their political capital on the shitastic program that caused this federal logjam and the current divide.

Yeah that definitely sounds like Republicans are more to blame. Democrats poisoning the political environment with Obamacare (let's assume that's true for a second) doesn't explain or excuse Republicans denying all reason when it comes to gun control 6 years later.

I do fault democrats for voting against the two republican amendments last week. They were both shitty half measures but if the Democratic mantra on no-fly no-buy is that we need a small symbolic step to jump start real change then don't reject the opportunity to take a smaller symbolic step.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Yeah that definitely sounds like Republicans are more to blame. Democrats poisoning the political environment with Obamacare (let's assume that's true for a second) doesn't explain or excuse Republicans denying all reason when it comes to gun control 6 years later.

I do fault democrats for voting against the two republican amendments last week. They were both shitty half measures but if the Democratic mantra on no-fly no-buy is that we need a small symbolic step to jump start real change then don't reject the opportunity to take a smaller symbolic step.

It doesn't excuse it (as I said, I blame them as well), but it certainly explains it. If there was no Obamacare, the anti-Dem backlash wouldn't have been what it was. Hell, the Dems might still have control of both branches. It was the ultimate step on your own dick move. And, if it was going to be a one-and-done mega action for Obama anyway, had it been a sweeping anti-gun reform instead of a the shit sandwich of Obamacare, wouldn't the resulting political/governmental meltdown have been slightly more worthwhile? Instead, we fucked up the entire process for a garbage program. This is the chickens coming home to roost in a spectacular way.

 

[MysteryMen]

No fly, no buy encourages racial profiling and discourages due process. Do not want.

Yeah, but it's the No Fly list itself that encourages profiling and disregards due process. The guns thing doesn't add anything in that regard. And Republicans were all about supporting the No Fly list as a principle. So I don't think you get to now retract your support when suddenly we add a consequence that you don't like

 

[MysteryMen]

Ideally as few as possible.

Well obviously, but that doesn't answer the question. If you're going to use a self-defense argument for guns, we should at least have some numbers of how many lives they are actually saving. Because the numbers on the other side--how many lives they are costing--is enormous. This should be a balancing thing, right?

 

[jhmd2000]

Well obviously, but that doesn't answer the question. If you're going to use a self-defense argument for guns, we should at least have some numbers of how many lives they are actually saving. Because the numbers on the other side--how many lives they are costing--is enormous. This should be a balancing thing, right?

Not necessarily. Some idiot abusing his right to free speech shouldn't cost me mine. Agree?