'The' Gun Thread (Page 33)

Yay

+1 on the Behave. 

I think this is an example of where Obama broke his golden rule.  Never get into an issue that you don't have a clear path to victory.

The true irony of it all, is by pushing so hard on this legislation he and the Dems likely creation a new legion of 2A supporters that never existed before, and put millions of new guns in the hands of law abiding citizens across America.  So, for that I salute him.

Ya, how "shameful". All the talking heads of course are saying they completely went against the vast majority of American's wishes....

That's really weird, because when gun control passed here in Colorado... they did so against the vast majority of Coloradoans that were there and against it.... but there was that one couple from out of state that got to address the Senate that was for it.... and of course those other guys from Washington that kept calling telling them how to vote.

Ok, I'm jumping in and picking on Powerman because this isn't how this thread is going to go. And if you choose to keep it going that way, it just won't be.

Using a word in quotes is disingenuous; what you really meant to say is that the decision was right and just, and that the media and lobbying interests have kept it in the public eye in a different light than the public vote reflected. So just say it. 

Using "shameful" in quotes is adding a vitriolic component to your argument, in essence, trolling. I will say, right here and now: if that's the tone that keeps up, assume this topic is gone. Forever. 

That's your warning. And it took 5 posts to get it. 

Interesting thought there. 

Yeah, rkreuser, you may have missed that one.  That was a word that Obama used to describe the vote.  It's proper to quote it in that context......no?

I will just say I was happy with the outcome and glad to see our system work. Our government was set up so that the white house couldn't do anything or get everything that it wants. The system worked yesterday and for that I am glad.

I don't find it appropriate for the white house to dog on our system and the people there-in because things didn't go their way no matter who is in the white house. 

Will be interesting to see what happens next.

Oh and dang, oh so close on the concealed permit law. I have mixed feelings on it. On the one side I like the idea of states deciding their own rules. But at the same time I see a reason for the feds to step in on something like this. It is confusing, burdensome and legally dangerous the way it is now. I can carry a gun in my pocket with my CWP where I am now but if I drive 40 miles west of here I will get thrown in jail for it, makes it harder to be law abiding. If nothing else some sort of dedicated official trip planning website would be useful so you know if you are legal or not when traveling. 

I got to laughing when thinking about what you wrote in the bolded part......in my best Spicoli voice, "dude, you just admonished the President". 

Very good points indeed. 

As I said I was undecided on it. Sounds convenient and would be fine if it was run like driver's licenses with the state regulating and issuing. But as you said would most likely lead to federal regulation and ridiculous requirements.

I am happy with what Idaho did this year. We know have an enhanced permit that will give us reciprocity with 40 states, much better than the 20 something that we have now. 

I didn't miss that one, even a little. 

If that quote is attributable to the president, then attribute it to him. Without that context, it was read perfectly properly. I didn't have that context. 

And if it's sarcasm that was intended, use the sarc font. If not, attribute the quote to whom it is ascribed. 

Either you communicate clearly on the hot topics, or you don't. If you don't, it goes sideways. I also noticed DanielG in his news post didn't quote his source. Almost said something there, but didn't.

And I don't have a dog in the fight. So any thoughts of viewing this as 'one sided modding' should be put to bed. Any more mention of that is a non-starter. 

You know the thread is being modded closely. Toe the line. This will be my last post on this, in-line. 

I find Trevor Burris' article, Gun Debate Won't End Until There is Respect on Both Sides, instructive as to why the gun debate is so heated.  Taking a few steps back could lead to a better debate - overall and on BT.

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-debate-wont-end-until-there-respect-both-sides

Since we're all pretty sure what side everyone is on here, I'll say this....this is exactly how the system is BROKEN.  This wasn't a vote for/against background checks; it was partisian politics and re-election money coming from the lobbyists.  Pro-gun AND Anti-gun money.  Democrats and Republicans alike are guilty. 

Those who choose to wrap themselves in the constitution while proclaiming the founding fathers insisted their 2A rights are god-given should bow their heads in shame at the MANNER in which this decision was reached.  This was a glaring example of just how broken our Democracy really is.  This is NOT what the founding fathers intended.

So, yeah, I'm disappointed in the outcome.  If the decision went YOUR way; then congratulations to you.  But if you think for a minute this vote was not based soley upon the money and politics of re-election, then I have some land I'd like to sell you.

Funny thing is that I think people were making the same points when the stimulus passed.  "It's not going to do anything, it's just a Democrat pork bill."  

Our system has gotten pretty messed-up by party-line voting and pork add-ons to bills.  At least when a bill dies, the taxpayers don't have to pay for the enactment of it...

That's my bad. I read past it. Carry on.

Thanks for your effort to get the thread pulled. Consider the bait not taken. 

ETA: bolded sections that are in clear violation of "the rules".