7 Pages V  « < 3 4 5 6 7 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Irrational Fear Of Terrorists?
jstcrsn
post Jun 15 2016, 10:32 PM
Post #81


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.844
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 15 2016, 09:57 PM) *
I have to agree to disagree about the "loophole" smile.gif The loophole is that you can, as a Terrorist, go to a gun show and buy any weapon you like without having to have a BACKGROUND CHECK. That's a loophole if there ever was a loophole. But terrorists/nuts don't have to do that, as they can just go buy guns at the local gun store. How easy smile.gif Let's make it as easy as we can for them right? I had a full background check when I bought my weapon and I"m registered as a gun owner in Ga. I"m a "law abiding" gun owner. Thus, I went through the legal hoops of buying a gun. Background checks should be mandatory IMHO or we are just begging terrorists to buy all the guns they want.



Dealers really don't want go to jail for 20 years just sell something illegally they can sell legally

This post has been edited by jstcrsn: Jun 15 2016, 10:40 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jun 15 2016, 11:18 PM
Post #82


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.844
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 15 2016, 03:22 PM) *
The bulk of followers of Islam are peace loving, hard working people. They don't want any association with the nut jobs any more than Christians want to be associated with Christians who bomb abortion clinics.

it start at 12:00 if I don't code it right
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spock
post Jun 15 2016, 11:56 PM
Post #83


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.295
Joined: 26-December 12
From: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Member No.: 17.265



Honestly Todd - you have not studied Islam enough to make those comparisons. Yes - there a nut jobs in any religion - but to call it hypocritical when considering the majority of Islam is a true sign that you don't know what you are talking about and have not studied anything on Islam - but just wish to feel that way.

The "moderate" Muslims are NOT the vast majority. In Islam moderate should be changed to westernized. Westernized muslims are considered heretics to the vast amount of middle eastern Muslims.

I'm sorry if this doesn't sit right with you but it is the absolute truth. All it takes is research to find this out. Just because something feels right and lovey dovery does not make it so.

Islam is NOT compatible with western civilization unless they individually become westernized. Even so called "moderate" not westernized muslims, condone killing gays.

There is no greater danger to culture then the mass immigration of middle eastern Muslims.

And I'm not preparing for prophecy sake - I'm prepping for common sense sake.

You must not take the seriousness of our dilapidated power grid being compromised seriously either. Another clear sign you have not studied on that subject either.

Yes this guy was a nut job.

He was a nut job that cheered 911 when we were attacked. He was a nut job when he declared he was part of al-queda, and since al-queda is basically wiped out he claimed allegiance to ISIS.

He is the absolute epitome of a Muslim Terrorists. And All Muslim terrorists are nut jobs.

Make no doubt about it - this was an planned terrorist attack in the name of Islam that was cheered through the Muslim world and he is being called the Lion of the Caliphate.

Under Sharia law you have 3 choices, See if these sound loving and moderate: Convert to Islam, Pay an exorbitant tax and be treated as a 2nd class citizen, or die.

That sums up the "Religion of Peace".

The only path Islam is on is a path to a 1 world caliphate, the destruction of Israel and of course the Great Satan - You and me. And judging from the mass murders in Europe along with the heinous acts to the indigenous people of those countries - they have started their march to conquest.

Seeing it with rose colored glasses doesn't change a thing.

There is no other religion or spiritual group in the world responsible for the amount of innocent deaths as Islam. That ideology is the true plague of this planet.

BTW - everyone with your position brings up abortion clinic bombings. Please list all of those bombings. Can you count them on 1 hand? 2 Hands? Actually from 1993 to 2015 there were 12 murders at abortion clinics (not including the murder of babies of course). There were numerous acts of arson - but in total 84. 12 murders 84 total acts reported. Killing in the name of Islam has far surpassed that in just the first 10 days of this month during Ramadan 2016.

Then I will post the amount of Islam terrorist attacks that has taken place in the past few years - it will be a very large post.

Here's just a taste for Ramadan of this year - and we're not even half way through...



What's hypocritical to me is comparing violence of other religions to the violence of Islam IMHO. smile.gif

This post has been edited by Spock: Jun 16 2016, 09:50 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spock
post Jun 16 2016, 09:41 AM
Post #84


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.295
Joined: 26-December 12
From: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Member No.: 17.265



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jun 16 2016, 04:56 PM
Post #85


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.844
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Spock @ Jun 15 2016, 08:24 PM) *
I purchased an M4A1 about 10 years ago that was semi-automatic but I just recently put a bump stock on it which is completely legal (right now) and it can fire single shot, 3 round burst or fully automatic.

Pretty cool device...
]


Strange how these debates always turn into an "irrational fear of guns" thread

this is going to be my next build

Listen to him breath in comparison to just firing the gun !

This post has been edited by jstcrsn: Jun 16 2016, 05:14 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jun 16 2016, 05:39 PM
Post #86


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.873
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



And here ya go smile.gif Quick pic detailing which states actually require background checks at gun shows smile.gif In my state, Georgia, NO bacground checks required. It's the states that DO NOT require background checks that I am personally opposed to. The states that DO require them, (as in the video you shared) are doing just fine IMHO smile.gif

Attached Image

Youtube doesn't always make a great "source". You can find vids to substantiate nearly any view. Also, in many cases the folks making a given video leave off the bits that go against the argument being made, as in the vid shared. sad.gif

Todd




QUOTE (jstcrsn @ Jun 15 2016, 05:32 PM) *


Dealers really don't want go to jail for 20 years just sell something illegally they can sell legally



--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mertay
post Jun 16 2016, 05:47 PM
Post #87


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Senior
Posts: 2.929
Joined: 27-May 13
From: Turkey / izmir
Member No.: 18.294



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 04:39 PM) *
Attached Image


ohmy.gif I heard it was easy to get a gun in USA but no background checks!? thats simply wrong.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jun 16 2016, 05:53 PM
Post #88


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.873
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



I can appreciate how you feel, but the same argument you are making could be leveled right back. It could easily be said that perhaps you don't know enough to suggest that most are violent. As Kris asked, "what are your sources" youtube videos made by folks that share a given worldview don't really hold muster as an objective "source" sadly sad.gif So then, I'll try to share some stats. Here is a pew poll used by BOTH SIDES to justify various arguments. In historically Muslim countries, there is a disturbing comfort level with violence and Sharia, in many cases. However, there are many historically muslim countries who do not poll this way. Let's talk about American muslims first as this is our country smile.gif


Support for violence among Muslims Worldwide
From the pew poll
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worl...full-report.pdf

Few U.S. Muslims voice support for suicide bombing or other forms of violence against civilians
in the name of Islam; 81% say such acts are never justified, while fewer than one-in-ten say
violence against civilians either is often justified (1%) or is sometimes justified (7%) to defend
Islam. Around the world, most Muslims also reject suicide bombing and other attacks against
civilians. However, substantial minorities in several countries say such acts of violence are at
least sometimes justified, including 26% of Muslims in Bangladesh, 29% in Egypt, 39% in
Afghanistan and 40% in the Palestinian territories


Not shocking to find out the Palestinian muslims are more violent. They are often invaded and killed by their neighbor. And there are substantial minorities of violent muslims in many of the countries as listed. However, it's important to note that in every case listed, these are MINORITY VIEWS. In the United States, where we do a better job integrating people than some countries, the numbers drop to 1%.

I've looked in to this in depth. I'm not speaking off the cuff here. I'm open to any research that anyone wants to share. Let's not call youtube vids, created by folks who are biased either for or against, to valid sources though eh?

Nut job, not a member of isis
Also, as far as his connection to "ISIS" and islamic terror. As I mentioned, he first gave credit to HEZBOLAH then gave credit to ISIS. Anyone who knows better will tell you that these organizations hate each other and that what this shows is that he did this for himself, only. The terror groups latched on to it of course, in order to give themselves the appearance of power. He was another lone wolf nut. He just happened to be Muslim. He may have also been Gay. His inability to resolve this, led him perhaps to this act in order to try to cleanse his soul through martrydom. He had been going and dancing/drinking at this club/using gay hookup aps on his phone for many years according to his current and ex wife.


Prepping
on the subject of prepping. Any reason is a good reason IMHO. And yes, I know well how our infrastructure is in need of repair. I only hope the next folks in charge will spend some money repairing it, instead of building billions (2.8 billion) in main battle tanks that the Army doesn't need, according to the Army itself.. sad.gif E.g. 2000 abrahms tanks sitting in a parking lot.

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/09/a...s-but-no-tanks/


Deaths By Religion Christianity vs Islam: Christianity 15 Million, Islam 2 Million
Also, I've looked in to this topic in depth as well. I try to research any topic that I make any claims about before I make the claims.
Here is a handy link detailing the bloody history of both religions. Sadly, the Christians win by SEVEN TO ONE over islam. So just like the first argument, it may be that perhaps you have not researched this to adequate depth?

https://www.quora.com/Which-religion-is-res...-entire-history



QUOTE (Spock @ Jun 15 2016, 06:56 PM) *
Hon



What's hypocritical to me is comparing violence of other religions to the violence of Islam IMHO. smile.gif



I AGREE!! smile.gif That is why I support background checks in EVERY STATE at EVERY GUNSHOW. If you want a gun, you should have to pass a background check to show if you are legally insane, have a history of violence, are under FBI suspicion, etc. Granted, sometimes it may get in the way of someone who might deserve a gun. But on the whole, it serves to protect the public interest in safety IMHO. I submitted to a background check to get my gun. Had zero problem with it. Waited the few days required and bingo, gun owner. smile.gif

QUOTE (Mertay @ Jun 16 2016, 12:47 PM) *
ohmy.gif I heard it was easy to get a gun in USA but no background checks!? thats simply wrong.


This post has been edited by Todd Simpson: Jun 16 2016, 06:25 PM


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spock
post Jun 16 2016, 06:39 PM
Post #89


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.295
Joined: 26-December 12
From: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Member No.: 17.265



Intersting - I live in South Carolina and I've had a background check run on every gun I've purchased.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fkalich
post Jun 16 2016, 07:51 PM
Post #90


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 12-February 07
From: People's Republic of Lawrence Kansas
Member No.: 1.189



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 11:53 AM) *
Not shocking to find out the Palestinian muslims are more violent. They are often invaded and killed by their neighbor. And there are substantial minorities of violent muslims in many of the countries as listed. However, it's important to note that in every case listed, these are MINORITY VIEWS. In the United States, where we do a better job integrating people than some countries, the numbers drop to 1%.



More violence from Palastine? GDP per capita in Palestine averaged 1309.66 USD from 1994 until 2013, reaching an all time high of 1653 USD in 2012 and a record low of 879.52 USD in 2002. You try living on an income like that. Surprise surprise that some young men pick up guns rather than resigning themselves to the life of living in a slum in abject poverty. How about Afganistan? Taken as a whole, life expectancy for Afghans is still just 48 years, and the average annual national income per capita is about $410. You thought living on about $1,500 a year was tough, try it on $410 a year. Let's look at the Sudan. $960 a year average income, compared to Aganistan, they live in style. How about Syria? $1,200 a year, now that is big money, what are those people raising hell for? If they can't get by on almost $4 a day to pay their living expenses, well what can you say?

Radical religion just becomes an umbrella that these desperate people unify themselves under, it is symbolic, but it is not the primary cause of conflicts. Actually in my experience, as religions go, the one where I have observed the most intolerance is certainly among those calling themselves Christian.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AK Rich
post Jun 16 2016, 08:01 PM
Post #91


Learning Guitar Hero
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.674
Joined: 10-September 11
From: Big Lake, Alaska
Member No.: 13.839



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 08:39 AM) *
And here ya go smile.gif Quick pic detailing which states actually require background checks at gun shows smile.gif In my state, Georgia, NO bacground checks required. It's the states that DO NOT require background checks that I am personally opposed to. The states that DO require them, (as in the video you shared) are doing just fine IMHO smile.gif

Attached Image

Youtube doesn't always make a great "source". You can find vids to substantiate nearly any view. Also, in many cases the folks making a given video leave off the bits that go against the argument being made, as in the vid shared. sad.gif

Todd

Sorry Todd but you have no idea what you are talking about, Read the Brady Act, It is FEDERAL LAW. You are talking about private purchases between individuals and in some states the sales to those who already have a permit, which means they have been pre-screened and have already been though the check within the last 5 years before the purchase. If their permit is over 5 years old then they have to re-screen.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1025

http://smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-background-checks/

http://smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-private-sales/

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/p...dy-permit-chart

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Inst...nd_Check_System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States

If you don't believe me why don't you try it? Go to a gun show in your state that you say doesn't require a check and try to buy. It ain't gonna happen without a check. Then after they tell you they need info for a check you can just back out of the deal so you don't have to spend any money on a firearm you may not actually want.
Or, if you would like to get a Colt 1911, and you can without a background check I will pay for it and buy you a holster and an extra clip for it to boot. No BS.
But if you can't purchase that Colt without a check, you will need to send me your beloved old school Ibanez RG. Deal?
A private sale between one individual to another does not count.

Oh and one more thing concerning the no fly list being used to disqualify folks from purchasing a firearm. Here is the ACLU's position on the issue.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/unti...eoples-freedoms

This post has been edited by AK Rich: Jun 16 2016, 08:21 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jun 16 2016, 08:55 PM
Post #92


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.873
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



SPOCK: Despite that, it's not required by law in South Carolina for Gun shows. sad.gif Did you purchase at Gun shows?

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/gun-show...e-laws-map.html

QUOTE (Spock @ Jun 16 2016, 01:39 PM) *
Intersting - I live in South Carolina and I've had a background check run on every gun I've purchased.


AKRICH: I hate to have to say it again, but I sorta do know smile.gif
First up, this is from ONE OF YOUR LINKS:
---
Closing the private sale loophole – The Brady Act applies only to sales by FFLs. Accordingly, persons who purchase firearms from private sellers – estimated to be 40 percent of all gun purchasers – are not required to undergo background checks.16 Additional information about private transfers is contained in Federal Law on Private Sales.
---
**Pretty big loophole eh? 40 percent of ALL GUN SALES! Onward to the Gunshow loophole.

Here is a link from governing.com and the info as it relates to what is happening under the current state of laws.

THE GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/gun-show...e-laws-map.html
-----

Known as the "gun show loophole," most states do not require background checks for firearms purchased at gun shows from private individuals -- federal law only requires licensed dealers to conduct checks.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law clearly defined private sellers as anyone who sold no more than four firearms per year. But the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act lifted that restriction and loosely defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood.

Some states have opted to go further than federal law by requiring background checks at gun shows for any gun transaction, federal license or not. The majority of these such states require background checks at the point of transfer for all firearms. Alternatively, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey and North Carolina regulate purchases by prohibiting private dealers from selling to individuals who do not have licenses/permits, which they obtain following background checks. Some states' requirements are limited only to handgun purchases.


Even in states that do not require background checks of private vendors, the venue hosting the event may require it as a matter of policy. In other cases, private vendors may opt to have a third-party licensed dealer run a background check even though it may not be required by law.

Last Updated: January 2016

--------

CONCLUSIONS: According to your own sources, 40 percent of all gun sales go through the loophole of private sale, requiring no background check at all. Further, under current law, 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood. As a result, vendors at gun shows need only say that gun sales are not their principal method of livelihood and bam, no background check required. Such has been my experience at every gun show I"ve ever been to.


------
As for the ACLU, they are more than welcome to any thoughts they may have. I have been expressing my personal thoughts, which seem to be a bit different. Then again, I"ve never claimed allegiance to the ACLU. I still think anyone on a watch list should be banned from buying firearms until they are off the list. Seems like basic common sense. The good of the many wins out for me on this. Simple as that smile.gif

We have had many guns shows here in GA, and I've gotten to the point of purchase at every one I've gone to without being asked for so much as my drivers license. Maybe I just got lucky? It seems that there is just a steady flow of bad info coming from the NRA and other sources that just serves to muddy the water. The link to the bit from governing.com breaks it down in really simple terms. There is a huge loophole in gun shows, not to mention the 40 percent of all gun sales that are "personal sales" that require no background check at all. So any gun owner could sell to a terrorist/jihadist or buy guns for them, and nobody would know, nor could they do anything about it. This is simply BAD LAW imho.

Todd


QUOTE (AK Rich @ Jun 16 2016, 03:01 PM) *
Sorry Todd but you have no idea what you are talking about, Read the Brady Act, It is FEDERAL LAW. Y.Here is the ACLU's position on the issue.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/unti...eoples-freedoms


Well said smile.gif Indeed, Palestine is a nation under occupation by any definition and the poverty they experience is part of what pushes many of them to vote for Hezbolah (a Terrorist group) or join a radical mosque. They simply lack other valid options. This is what I was talking about in terms of understanding the root cause in order to fix the problem. Poverty, prejudice, overt discrimination, occupation of ones homeland, the "collateral damage" of war, etc. These things are the seed of radicalism. IMHO the only way to address these things is at the source. Not at the results stage.

QUOTE (fkalich @ Jun 16 2016, 02:51 PM) *
More violence from Palastine? GDP per capita in Palestine averaged 1309.66 USD from 1994 until 2013, reaching an all time high of 1653 USD in 2012 and a record low of 879.52 USD in 2002. You try living on an income like that. Surprise surprise that some young men pick up guns rather than resigning themselves to the life of living in a slum in abject poverty. How about Afganistan? Taken as a whole, life expectancy for Afghans is still just 48 years, and the average annual national income per capita is about $410. You thought living on about $1,500 a year was tough, try it on $410 a year. Let's look at the Sudan. $960 a year average income, compared to Aganistan, they live in style. How about Syria? $1,200 a year, now that is big money, what are those people raising hell for? If they can't get by on almost $4 a day to pay their living expenses, well what can you say?

Radical religion just becomes an umbrella that these desperate people unify themselves under, it is symbolic, but it is not the primary cause of conflicts. Actually in my experience, as religions go, the one where I have observed the most intolerance is certainly among those calling themselves Christian.


This post has been edited by Todd Simpson: Jun 16 2016, 09:08 PM


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jun 16 2016, 09:22 PM
Post #93


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.844
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 08:55 PM) *
We have had many guns shows here in GA, and I've gotten to the point of purchase at every one I've gone to without being asked for so much as my drivers license. Maybe I just got lucky?

Todd

Than that dealer violated federal law and can get 20 years . This is a cnn report on the checks that are required by law right now
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/10/politics/bac...iner/index.html

I as well have , have to go thru one of these checks every time I have to buy one in solidly red Kansas, At gun shows also. You are mislead from the graph on your post. If you read the article you took your map from , at the top it mentions that dealers having to go thru a check( database) (sounds like a background check to me) this is the check in the above link, but for some reason your article has a different opinion of what a background check is. Here is the full article if you want to see how todd cherry picked
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-j...e-laws-map.html

You are forgetting as well , if someone sells a firearm registered to them and someone else uses it in a crime , it is very likely you will be prosecuted for this , so most people that do private sles don't want a gun registered to them in the wrong hands

But it goes further than that , many peolpe are turned down because store owners get a bad feeling just this latest one in which the gun store owner was diligent in reporting it to the officials who did nothing
https://gma.yahoo.com/orlando-shooter-turne...opstories.html#

This post has been edited by jstcrsn: Jun 16 2016, 09:25 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AK Rich
post Jun 16 2016, 09:49 PM
Post #94


Learning Guitar Hero
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.674
Joined: 10-September 11
From: Big Lake, Alaska
Member No.: 13.839



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 11:55 AM) *
SPOCK: Despite that, it's not required by law in South Carolina for Gun shows. sad.gif Did you purchase at Gun shows?

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/gun-show...e-laws-map.html



AKRICH: I hate to have to say it again, but I sorta do know smile.gif
First up, this is from ONE OF YOUR LINKS:
---
Closing the private sale loophole – The Brady Act applies only to sales by FFLs. Accordingly, persons who purchase firearms from private sellers – estimated to be 40 percent of all gun purchasers – are not required to undergo background checks.16 Additional information about private transfers is contained in Federal Law on Private Sales.
---
**Pretty big loophole eh? 40 percent of ALL GUN SALES! Onward to the Gunshow loophole.

Here is a link from governing.com and the info as it relates to what is happening under the current state of laws.

THE GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/gun-show...e-laws-map.html
-----

Known as the "gun show loophole," most states do not require background checks for firearms purchased at gun shows from private individuals -- federal law only requires licensed dealers to conduct checks.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law clearly defined private sellers as anyone who sold no more than four firearms per year. But the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act lifted that restriction and loosely defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood.

Some states have opted to go further than federal law by requiring background checks at gun shows for any gun transaction, federal license or not. The majority of these such states require background checks at the point of transfer for all firearms. Alternatively, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey and North Carolina regulate purchases by prohibiting private dealers from selling to individuals who do not have licenses/permits, which they obtain following background checks. Some states' requirements are limited only to handgun purchases.


Even in states that do not require background checks of private vendors, the venue hosting the event may require it as a matter of policy. In other cases, private vendors may opt to have a third-party licensed dealer run a background check even though it may not be required by law.

Last Updated: January 2016

--------

CONCLUSIONS: According to your own sources, 40 percent of all gun sales go through the loophole of private sale, requiring no background check at all. Further, under current law, 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood. As a result, vendors at gun shows need only say that gun sales are not their principal method of livelihood and bam, no background check required. Such has been my experience at every gun show I"ve ever been to.


------
As for the ACLU, they are more than welcome to any thoughts they may have. I have been expressing my personal thoughts, which seem to be a bit different. Then again, I"ve never claimed allegiance to the ACLU. I still think anyone on a watch list should be banned from buying firearms until they are off the list. Seems like basic common sense. The good of the many wins out for me on this. Simple as that smile.gif

We have had many guns shows here in GA, and I've gotten to the point of purchase at every one I've gone to without being asked for so much as my drivers license. Maybe I just got lucky? It seems that there is just a steady flow of bad info coming from the NRA and other sources that just serves to muddy the water. The link to the bit from governing.com breaks it down in really simple terms. There is a huge loophole in gun shows, not to mention the 40 percent of all gun sales that are "personal sales" that require no background check at all. So any gun owner could sell to a terrorist/jihadist or buy guns for them, and nobody would know, nor could they do anything about it. This is simply BAD LAW imho.

Todd


LOL The only reason I used that particular site as a reference is so you couldn't say it wasn't a legit source since it is from a pro gun control group and was only posted to show what the law is and not what this groups OPINION was on the laws or their version of stats. That 40% figure is complete rubbish. Other studies show the number of private sales to be .07 %. And a private sale loophole is different from a gun show loophole which is what I have been saying, and there really aren't many private sellers at gun shows and the ones that are there are watched by law enforcement that frequently sends undercover agents to these shows to root out folks who may be trying to skirt the law.
To claim that a background check is not required in your state or any other state is complete bullshit and I invite you to put your Ibanez where your mouth is and see for yourself.

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/03/guns-acqu...kground-checks/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spock
post Jun 16 2016, 10:17 PM
Post #95


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.295
Joined: 26-December 12
From: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Member No.: 17.265



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 03:55 PM) *
SPOCK: Despite that, it's not required by law in South Carolina for Gun shows. sad.gif Did you purchase at Gun shows?



No, I purchased all mine from gun stores.

Interesting links concerning Christian versus Islamic killing.

I must say though that I am a big fan of the Crusades, and they were tying to give safe passage to Jerusalem and take the city back.

However, did you read the comments below the guys assessment? Tends to level the playing field quite a bit.

Also - I should have made myself clearer, I'm talking about more recent attacks - say, since the invention of the radio. Don't get me wrong, I'm still pissed that Persia Invaded Greece - filthy buggers.

And I realize the Catholics and Protestants went at each other like Pit Bulls. But you have to admit that there has been a major reformation in the church since the Protestant reformation.

In 2016 alone - THIS YEAR!!!! There have been 1067 Islamic attacks in 47 countries, in which 10022 people were killed and 12050 injured. Not including Orlando - the list can be updated.

The list for the past 5 years is staggering. And the worse part about it is that this is not against another warring faction but against regular citizens.

You must see the difference. Wars of hundreds or thousands of years ago don't compare to today's civilization.

This post has been edited by Spock: Jun 16 2016, 11:15 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Todd Simpson
post Jun 16 2016, 11:34 PM
Post #96


GMC:er
Group Icon

Group: GMC Instructor
Posts: 14.873
Joined: 23-December 09
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Member No.: 8.794



SPOCK: The point I was making was about the gun show loophole. Not about buying guns from stores. If you buy a gun from a store, yes, you will have to go through the process smile.gif I bought from a gun store as well and went through the same process. Did you read my actual post? sad.gif

It's hard for me to be a "fan" of the crusades as they did kill every man/woman/child when they entered jerusalem and it's said "blood ran to the knee". This sort of slaughter is simply unchristian no matter what it's purpose. Christ was not about violence. So killing women and chlldren in his hame would not be something he would suggest or approve of IMHO. The sermon on the mount pretty much covers his personal ideology. He was a pacifist. This irks many. He was also socialist. All early christians kept all money in "common" until it was Romanized and corrupted and became the catholic church. sad.gif Having read the scriptures, I still wonder how it ever got that bad. Much like the man from Nazareth, I oppose the slaughter of women and children, no matter what the purpose. What's worse, the Muslims took the city back so it was pointless. But I digress sad.gif Christians still out kill Muslims 7 TO 1. in historical terms sad.gif

I know you were talking about recent attacks. That's why I wanted to put some historical perspective on things. If we are staying current, we would have to keep aware of the "collateral damage" in IRAQ, and Afghanistan caused by our military. It's this collateral damage that serves as propaganda for recruiting radicals. We saw some of it, remember? The apache chopper mowing down civilians and journalists that went viral? Just a small tip of the iceberg. sad.gif

So even if we keep it to modern times. We have invaded Muslim countries, (Like Iraq) for no reason, killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims, for no apparent reason and called it "collateral damage" and we wonder why radicalism is on the rise. sad.gif Here is an article about this very thing from BROWN UNIVERSITY (Ivy League school for reference) showing over 200,000 CIVILIANS KILLED as a result of our "wars" in the region.

http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians

So even if we keep it to recent history, we are winning the KILL COUNT by leaps and bounds. It's just the simple truth. We have created our own monster. We never should have invaded these places at all. 15 of the 19 hijackers of 911 were from SAUDI ARABIA and yet we have no war with them. Instead, we have destabilized an entire region and allowed the expansion of forces like ISIS (many of whom are ex Iraqi army). If we want to be honest, we have done this to ourselves. sad.gif

QUOTE (Spock @ Jun 16 2016, 05:17 PM) *
No, I purchased all mine from gun stores.

Interesting links concerning Christian versus Islamic killing.

I must say though that I am a big fan of the Crusades, and they were tying to give safe passage to Jerusalem and take the city back.

However, did you read the comments below the guys assessment? Tends to level the playing field quite a bit.

Also - I should have made myself clearer, I'm talking about more recent attacks - say, since the invention of the radio. Don't get me wrong, I'm still pissed that Persia Invaded Greece - filthy buggers.

And I realize the Catholics and Protestants went at each other like Pit Bulls. But you have to admit that there has been a major reformation in the church since the Protestant reformation.

In 2016 alone - THIS YEAR!!!! There have been 1067 Islamic attacks in 47 countries, in which 10022 people were killed and 12050 injured. Not including Orlando - the list can be updated.

The list for the past 5 years is staggering. And the worse part about it is that this is not against another warring faction but against regular citizens.

You must see the difference. Wars of hundreds or thousands of years ago don't compare to today's civilization.


This post has been edited by Todd Simpson: Jun 16 2016, 11:36 PM


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jun 17 2016, 01:05 AM
Post #97


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.844
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Todd Simpson @ Jun 16 2016, 11:34 PM) *
s sad.gif Christians still out kill Muslims 7 TO 1. in historical terms sad.gif

here was alittle friendly debate that found otherwise
http://www.debate.org/debates/History-sugg...f-their-god./2/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spock
post Jun 17 2016, 01:30 AM
Post #98


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1.295
Joined: 26-December 12
From: South Carolina, U.S.A.
Member No.: 17.265



QUOTE (jstcrsn @ Jun 16 2016, 08:05 PM) *
here was alittle friendly debate that found otherwise
http://www.debate.org/debates/History-sugg...f-their-god./2/



I saw that as well and decided not to post it - good read though.


Todd - I understand the U.S. led invasion of the middle east is terrible - we shouldn't be there. But that can not be classified as a "Christian" war.

As fars as the crusades, here's some history for you...







This post has been edited by Spock: Jun 17 2016, 01:32 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fkalich
post Jun 17 2016, 01:31 AM
Post #99


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.743
Joined: 12-February 07
From: People's Republic of Lawrence Kansas
Member No.: 1.189



QUOTE (Spock @ Jun 16 2016, 04:17 PM) *
I must say though that I am a big fan of the Crusades, and they were tying to give safe passage to Jerusalem and take the city back.

You must see the difference. Wars of hundreds or thousands of years ago don't compare to today's civilization.


No, not really. The impetus behind the Crusades came from Alexius I, Emperor of the Byzantine Empire. He had attained power after a civil war, and was challenged from two sources, Normans and Seljuk Turks. He managed to fend off the Normans, and actually had successfully defended Constantinople from invasion. Curiously enough the major threat to him came from Christians fighting for the Turks, and his success largely was due to convincing a different Turkish people to come in on his side in opposition to the Seljuk Turks.

However to consolidate his position, he needed to win back lands (largely modern day Turkey) that Constantinople had lost to the Seljuks. He followed the traditional pattern of hiring mercenaries by appealing to the Pope and other Western European leader for help. The Papacy had itself experienced a string of power struggles with some European leaders, and Pope Urban also needed to consolidate his position. The request by Alexius for help was just what the doctor ordered, as he could be the catalyst in orchestrating what became the 1st Crusade.

This is where the "take back Jerusalem" part came in. This became a propaganda tool used to drum up support among the various leaders and populations. They could not really ask leaders and populations to travel for years and suffer privation, for the expressed prupose of consolidating the political positions of the Emperor of Constantinople and the Pope.l

And no, this all does sound very familiar to me, right up to date, right in line with what is happening today. The mindless masses getting manipulated by an individual trying to achieve a position of power, for no other reason other than he wants to be king of the hill, a man who will say anything, do anything if it serves the purpose of encouraging them to pull his lever in November. Sounds familiar to me, say technique used by Alexius and Urban a thousand years ago, same by European leadership in 1914 used to get 10 million to charge machine guns for no other purpose than to maintained the positions of wealth of European capitalists and monarchs, and the same thing I can read today in the election news where Trump spoon feeds you whatever you will lap up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jstcrsn
post Jun 17 2016, 01:37 AM
Post #100


GMC:er
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2.844
Joined: 29-March 08
From: kansas, USA
Member No.: 4.733



QUOTE (Kristofer Dahl @ Jun 14 2016, 08:08 PM) *
- then we must start understing who these people are and why they became what they are today. Know your enemies for real!

Therein lies the long term solution. And I am primarily interested in the long term solution, because I have two small kids and I want them to grow up in a better world.

The only way to know your enemy is be truthful of their beliefs as it refers to what their holy book says and it seems to many people turn a blind eye so no one will call them a bigot .
They are raised from birth ,taught that those that don't believe are infidels , second class citizens , even dogs to many of them . This is why they spit at female hospitall staffers in Europe that are trying to help them
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/1...he_kingdom.html .If you are raised like that , what will happen when you are approached by some one you have been taught look down upon. You will look down upon them . It has happened to me and I want you to pay attention to how they will treat you should you have an encounter ( not the ones you grew up with , times change, the ones now entering your coutry) , They look at you and talk to you as if they would rather not have to put up with you. Now there are many friendly Muslims to be sure , but as many as fifty percent of the ones I meet , treat me this way
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  « < 3 4 5 6 7 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st August 2017 - 10:31 PM