2 minutes into briefing on Roseburg massacre Obama politicizing it.

exthrower wrote:

Christians are all Conservatives.

Except for, you know, Christ himself.

No one in history can sell guns like Obama!

The gun industry loves this POTUS!

Every time Obama speaks about guns...sales sky rocket!

Way to go \"O!!!\"

spade detector wrote:

The US has a much higher gun related killings rate than any other developed country.

1) Is this acceptable?

2) What is the cause?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/chart-the-u-s-has-far-more-gun-related-killings-than-any-other-developed-country/

1. No

2. Access. If Democratic supporters of gun regulation were worth their word, they would propose repealing the second amendment. Once you have passed that, you can begin mandatory seizure of all guns. Failure to turn over guns can be penalized by death. Gun problem solved. Until this common sense proposal is put forward, the President and all who agree with him are simply speaking empty words.

Lib-tard wrote:

He's just expressing the views of the 92% of Americans who want background checks on gun buyers.

Background checks are already done on 100% of new guns sales. You cannon buy a new gun anywhere in the US without a background check and filling out forms asking all sorts of questions about mental health, restraining orders, and so on. There is also a check of your name and your fingerprints in NICS... National Instant Criminal Background Check. I know for a fact that they also check fingerprints taken at the time of sale with the NICS database.

I had to do NICS myself a couple months back when I bought another gun. There was nothing in this guy's background that would have prevented him from legally buying a gun. In fact, one of the articles stated that all his guns were legally acquired.

While Obama has railed against guns, gun sales have skyrocketed under his administration. Since he took office, over 85 million NICS checks have been performed... meaning at least 85 million guns have been sold. Obama has done more to sell firearms than any President in US history.

Ironically, this community college apparently debated whether to arm its security guard last year and decided against it.

nopeacenogunlaws wrote:

It is in the libs best interest not to pass gun laws. Passing gun laws would have no effect (see Washington, DC), and then they wouldn't be able to complain about the issue any more. The issue is more valuable than the solution.

This is exactly the point

fisky wrote:

Lib-tard wrote:

He's just expressing the views of the 92% of Americans who want background checks on gun buyers.

Background checks are already done on 100% of new guns sales. You cannon buy a new gun anywhere in the US without a background check and filling out forms asking all sorts of questions about mental health, restraining orders, and so on.

While you are technically correct in that you cannot buy a new gun from a dealer without a background check, there are these things called gun shows where anyone can show up and buy a gun without any sort of check whatsoever.

Again the guns may not be technically new because the gun show "private citizen" acts as a middle man between the manufacturer/dealer and the buyer, meaning the gun is legally second hand, but if it hasn't been fired and is still in its original packaging, what's the difference?

fisky wrote:

While Obama has railed against guns, gun sales have skyrocketed under his administration. Since he took office, over 85 million NICS checks have been performed... meaning at least 85 million guns have been sold.

You're suggesting that not only does every NCIS check get approved, but that one check can actually result in the purchase of multiple guns. What kind of check is that?

exthrower wrote:

What a complete moron...There are 300 million guns in the US....It's too late to ban guns....Is Obama really that dumb?

Why do you think Obama has threatened to ban guns? Are you that dumb?

Obama is mixed but you libtards want to make exceptions. If one of their parents is black, then they are BLACK.

loop-de-loophole wrote:

fisky wrote:

Background checks are already done on 100% of new guns sales. You cannon buy a new gun anywhere in the US without a background check and filling out forms asking all sorts of questions about mental health, restraining orders, and so on.

While you are technically correct in that you cannot buy a new gun from a dealer without a background check, there are these things called gun shows where anyone can show up and buy a gun without any sort of check whatsoever.

Again the guns may not be technically new because the gun show "private citizen" acts as a middle man between the manufacturer/dealer and the buyer, meaning the gun is legally second hand, but if it hasn't been fired and is still in its original packaging, what's the difference?

The majority of people at gun shows are more careful than you might believe. I have friends who have declined to sell guns to people who seemed a little off.

Obviously there are people who will sell to anybody. They are unlikely to be deterred by changes in the law.

loop-de-loophole wrote:

fisky wrote:

Background checks are already done on 100% of new guns sales. You cannon buy a new gun anywhere in the US without a background check and filling out forms asking all sorts of questions about mental health, restraining orders, and so on.

While you are technically correct in that you cannot buy a new gun from a dealer without a background check, there are these things called gun shows where anyone can show up and buy a gun without any sort of check whatsoever.

Again the guns may not be technically new because the gun show "private citizen" acts as a middle man between the manufacturer/dealer and the buyer, meaning the gun is legally second hand, but if it hasn't been fired and is still in its original packaging, what's the difference?

I go to gun shows a couple times a year. What you have described is a criminal offense under Federal law. It's called a straw man purchase. It is not only illegal for the buyer, it's illegal for the dealer to sell knowingly to a straw man purchaser.

Obama is right wrote:

fisky wrote:

While Obama has railed against guns, gun sales have skyrocketed under his administration. Since he took office, over 85 million NICS checks have been performed... meaning at least 85 million guns have been sold.

You're suggesting that not only does every NCIS check get approved, but that one check can actually result in the purchase of multiple guns. What kind of check is that?

You are misinformed. Purchases are routinely disapproved by NICS. It happens all the time. Guys complain about it on gun forums because the approach is to err on the side of caution.

Obviously, only one NICS check would have to be performed if you bought more than one weapon at one specific time. Example: My buddy bought three guns at a gun show back in March. They only did one NICS check. I bought one at the same show. They did one NICS check on me.

I agree with you Sick Pres, Obama is wrong on the issue of firearms.

Runners, in all due respect, consider changing your perspective and become open to owning a firearm for target practice and/or protection of your person and home.

The following is a fact about liberals and democrats:

"Leftists revisionist history, where there is never any fear of Democracy going usurpatious [usurpative] or tyrannical is fictitious."

- B. Shapiro

The 2nd amendment is about tyranny not target practice or hunting; those are only natural conclusions.

No politician or Police is obligated to protect you and they can't be count on to help you in your need.

Thanks for you kind consideration.

Oh really? wrote:

Oh? wrote:

People snap sometimes. Has always happened, and probably always will happen. The issue is that when people snap these days, they sometimes don't retain the ability to control themselves enough to not go on a murdering rampage. That is a problem with our society and our collective mental health and attitudes, and that is what needs to be addressed. There are no stricter laws that will address it for us.

How about laws that keep guns out of the hands of those with mental health issues?

Those laws already exist, including in Oregon.

There is no law forbidding firearms for people who might eventually become mentally unstable, mostly because there is no good way to know that is going to happen (people can't see the future).

As such, should we not focus on the reason and not the means? After all, reducing accessibility of one means of action will not eliminate the action.

fisky wrote:

Obama is right wrote:

You're suggesting that not only does every NCIS check get approved, but that one check can actually result in the purchase of multiple guns. What kind of check is that?

You are misinformed. Purchases are routinely disapproved by NICS. It happens all the time. Guys complain about it on gun forums because the approach is to err on the side of caution.

I hope you're intelligent enough to realize that you are the one who misinformed him.

Kearse wrote:

fisky wrote:

You are misinformed. Purchases are routinely disapproved by NICS. It happens all the time. Guys complain about it on gun forums because the approach is to err on the side of caution.

I hope you're intelligent enough to realize that you are the one who misinformed him.

...like the little b1tches that you leftist all are.... What you going to do about? I tell you what you are going to do. Nothing! Nothing but pout like the wimps you all are. If you had a spine you would disarm every citizen in the USA. But none of you do and you can't.

Keep your powder dry America.

Kearse wrote:

fisky wrote:

You are misinformed. Purchases are routinely disapproved by NICS. It happens all the time. Guys complain about it on gun forums because the approach is to err on the side of caution.

I hope you're intelligent enough to realize that you are the one who misinformed him.

...like the little b1tches that you leftist all are.... What you going to do about? I tell you what you are going to do. Nothing! Nothing but pout like the wimps you all are. If you had a spine you would disarm every citizen in the USA. But none of you do and you can't.

Keep your powder dry America.

Come back when you learn how to post....once, moran.

Tyranny_has_and_can_exist wrote:

I agree with you Sick Pres, Obama is wrong on the issue of firearms.

Runners, in all due respect, consider changing your perspective and become open to owning a firearm for target practice and/or protection of your person and home.

The following is a fact about liberals and democrats:

"Leftists revisionist history, where there is never any fear of Democracy going usurpatious [usurpative] or tyrannical is fictitious."

- B. Shapiro

The 2nd amendment is about tyranny not target practice or hunting; those are only natural conclusions.

No politician or Police is obligated to protect you and they can't be count on to help you in your need.

Thanks for you kind consideration.

I agree that guns should only be used for target practice and I have no problem with owners keeping them securely in their homes but I'd strongly suggest they get a big dog so they won't have to use them.