Someone pls explain why Democrats don't want ICE contacted if illegal aliens attempt to buy guns

[LowEndC]

no, i dont care what you say, we are not taking away or banning guns.
i dont care if u say, well so this person dies, and that one dies, ok, take away the nations guns!! and if you dont, you support murder and nazis and rapists and johnson and johnson ... AND....AND.....

it doesnt matter.
look people.

if you take away guns from law-abiding citizens, criminals can still acquire guns.
i remember buying guns in a walmart parking lot.
ak47 mini draco
glock 22, 29, 17
FAL 308 battle rifle...

you will never get rid of guns.
just because a tard shoots a tard, or non tard,
doesnt mean it should be harder for me to defend myself, or completely take away the ability to defend myself,
because that bad guy is still going to have a gun, while me, my wife, and my kids have nothing but a flyswatter or a rolled up newspaper.
you liberals are the dumbest, lowest, dumbest people on this earth.

infraction incoming....

 

[RaptorDMG]

No. People who obey the law should be able to use their guns as a way to protect themselves from those who don't. If guns were banned it wouldn't stop criminals from using them. The United States defeated Britain and we had a huge disadvantage.

It wouldn't stop them from being used but they would be much less common among criminals and your point about the US vs Britain highlights the fact that war has changed since then, in the past it was about the numbers of troops you could bring to bear whereas now it is more about which side is better prepared

 

[PanTheFaun]

I'd also like to remind you that the Boston Tea party was nothing in reality but a cowardice act of terrorism.

You have a right to your own opinion.

and one huge advantage. you didn't need to ship your way into the fucking landmass first.

U mad?

 

[Tigran]

You have a right to your own opinion.

That's not opinion. If some undocumented immigrants did something like today... you'd be screaming it's terrorism. Besides, one could argue that the original colonists didn't come legally.

 

[IncredulousP]

no, i dont care what you say, we are not taking away or banning guns.
i dont care if u say, well so this person dies, and that one dies, ok, take away the nations guns!! and if you dont, you support murder and nazis and rapists and johnson and johnson ... AND....AND.....

it doesnt matter.
look people.

if you take away guns from law-abiding citizens, criminals can still acquire guns.
i remember buying guns in a walmart parking lot.
ak47 mini draco
glock 22, 29, 17
FAL 308 battle rifle...

you will never get rid of guns.
just because a tard shoots a tard, or non tard,
doesnt mean it should be harder for me to defend myself, or completely take away the ability to defend myself,
because that bad guy is still going to have a gun, while me, my wife, and my kids have nothing but a flyswatter or a rolled up newspaper.
you liberals are the dumbest, lowest, dumbest people on this earth.

infraction incoming....

This post is a giant oof of irony.

 

[Clydefrosch]

No. People who obey the law should be able to use their guns as a way to protect themselves from those who don't. If guns were banned it wouldn't stop criminals from using them. The United States defeated Britain and we had a huge disadvantage.

long term, of course it would.
criminals get rid of their guns after use or lose them once caught, they're a literal finite ressource once you stop giving them out like tic tacs.
an they're already quite pricy on the black market. at some point, the majority of criminals wouldn't be able to afford them anymore either.

also, if you own a gun in case of say armed robbery or even the very uncommon home invasion, you are very likely not getting out of this alive, they don't make you safer. so that argument is crap.

taking guns from idiots that need a blankie to feel safe at night also instantly removes the no.1 source for soon to be illegal guns on the market.

 

[PanTheFaun]

It wouldn't stop them from being used but they would be much less common among criminals and your point about the US vs Britain highlights the fact that war has changed since then, in the past it was about the numbers of troops you could bring to bear whereas now it is more about which side is better prepared

It doesn't matter. We have our guns to protect and hunt for ourselves and there is nothing wrong with that and it doesn't matter if you are disadvantaged or not because you're doing it for your freedom.

That's not opinion. If some undocumented immigrants did something like today... you'd be screaming it's terrorism. Besides, one could argue that the original colonists didn't come legally.

I would say that about anybody and not just immigrants. We came here and either bought land or fought for it.

 

[Tigran]

We came here and either bought land or fought for it.

Ahh yes.. Bio-terrorism.. Such a great way to fight for our land....

 

[Hanafuda]

The response of a 4473 background check only says pass or denied. There is now way to know now will there ever be for the employee running the check to see what particular issue, and I say issue because it can be an issue and nothing more. Further more, a valid state Id is required to run the 4473, of which the state government of that area felt it was worth issuing to the said individuals. The firearms store employee has no way to know if a crime has been committed, nor any onus to report on an event that is not considered a crime.

But as I said before, the background check doesn't run unless the buyer has made all the necessary representations on the 4473 that he/she is eligible/legal to buy. But you're correct that the FFL wouldn't know, as the system runs now, why the background check failed. Lacius asserted earlier that the amendment that was voted down was targeting illegal immigration specifically, but the FFL wouldn't know why he was referring the failed check to law enforcement, only that he was legally obliged to. There is no law right now that requires FFL's to make that referral, so in most states it doesn't happen. If you read the USAToday link I posted above, Pennsylvania is one state where failed checks do get referred. In 2017 the FFL's in Pennsylvania made 1,900 referral ... 470 resulted in convictions. That's some pretty strong numbers to show this would not be frivolous or unwarranted.

 

[Clydefrosch]

You have a right to your own opinion.


U mad?

I'm not a brit?
I'm just saying america 'freeing itself from little uks rule' wasn't exactly... hard, if you take into account literally any circumstances.

 

[PanTheFaun]

long term, of course it would.
criminals get rid of their guns after use or lose them once caught, they're a literal finite ressource once you stop giving them out like tic tacs.
an they're already quite pricy on the black market. at some point, the majority of criminals wouldn't be able to afford them anymore either.

also, if you own a gun in case of say armed robbery or even the very uncommon home invasion, you are very likely not getting out of this alive, they don't make you safer. so that argument is crap.

taking guns from idiots that need a blankie to feel safe at night also instantly removes the no.1 source for soon to be illegal guns on the market.

What a crock of shit and it protects people all the time. Say that next time when someone breaks into your home and you wish you had something to protect yourself with.

Ahh yes.. Bio-terrorism.. Such a great way to fight for our land....

All people fought for land at one point or another. Such is life.

 

[IncredulousP]

I'm not a brit?
I'm just saying america 'freeing itself from little uks rule' wasn't exactly... hard, if you take into account literally any circumstances.

Well, from what I understand, US had no chance in hell without the French backing them, and the US never even held up it's end of the bargain for the assistance.

 

[Tigran]

What a crock of shit and it protects people all the time. Say that next time when someone breaks into your home and you wish you had something to protect yourself with.


All people fought for land at one point or another. Such is life.

And yet.. Just going by your posts here in this thread... seems to indicate you'd have no problem with the government just -taking- people's land they supposedly fought for.

 

[Hanafuda]

Well, from what I understand, US had no chance in hell without the French backing them, and the US never even held up it's end of the bargain for the assistance.

We made up for that in 1944.

 

[RaptorDMG]

What a crock of shit and it protects people all the time. Say that next time when someone breaks into your home and you wish you had something to protect yourself with.


All people fought for land at one point or another. Such is life.

If someone breaks into my home I have a knife and baseball bat to defend myself. Guns don't work to well in close quarters.

 

[IncredulousP]

We made up for that in 1944.

Ha, we were hardly the ones solely responsible. Don't forget the Canadians and the British. And the loads of illegal immigrants as well.
Additionally, US only entered because Japan bombed Hawaii and Germany declared war on US. US didn't give half a shit about France unless it was buying US merch.

 

[PanTheFaun]

And yet.. Just going by your posts here in this thread... seems to indicate you'd have no problem with the government just -taking- people's land they supposedly fought for.

I have a huge problem with a tyrannical government taking other peoples land.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

If someone breaks into my home I have a knife and baseball bat to defend myself. Guns don't work to well in close quarters.

Really? I thought shotguns were pretty good at that...

 

[RaptorDMG]

I have a huge problem with a tyrannical government taking other peoples land.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


Really? I thought shotguns are pretty good at that...

Shotguns are also generally quite long and hard to manouvre in a narror hallway and if I can use the layout of the house to my advantage I could get a hit in and potentially disarm or incapacitate my opponent

 

[PanTheFaun]

Shotguns are also generally quite long and hard to manouvre in a narror hallway and if I can use the layout of the house to my advantage I could get a hit in and potentially disarm or incapacitate my opponent

You can use that example with a lot of things and a gun is a lot more effective at stopping someone. The last thing I'm saying about this is that I have a right to use my guns to defend my family, friends, and innocent people from criminals or a tyrannical government. If you or others don't think so... I disagree with your view but I respect it. A free people shall never give their right away to defend themselves from people whom wish to harm us.

 

[LowEndC]

This post is a giant oof of irony.

Where? im not a criminal, but i still buy guns from private parties, just incase the tards do pull through and a gun buyback is set in place.
ill be up there in the attic with ann frank.

look.
most of these people here spouting liberal views are younger adults that have no real grasp of reality or the world.
they are scared. they watch tv too much.
'they see a shooting on tv, and then all the sad music, and the shootings keep happening, then the hive mind gets together and crys out to have the guns taken away.
you people are kids.
im sorry, but guns arent the issue, theyve been around for over a thousand years, and wont go away.
it is the people that are the problem.
and theres always going to be those people in the cesspool.
look, if i wanted to,
if guns were banned,
go around and stab 20 people in a club.
trust me, i move fast.
or i could use another weapon, or i could use my bare hands.
thats the point!!
all liberals want is more control and more control and less rights for us,
its sad to say, but they attain this through shady means.
example.
create 10 mass shootings and prey on the publics garnered/farmed reaction to get the support they need to enact a ban or takeback
they do this with other things as well,
not just guns and mass shootings.

quit watching cnn and fox people.
use your common sense.
everyone was fine in the wild west... lol