|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 21, 2016 12:33:51 GMT -5
Yes, an illegal alien. A Christian Brit, no less. Who couldn't get a gun legally. And Congress refused 4 times yesterday to preserve the right of people on the no-fly list to purchase assault rifles. The land of the free and the home of the brave.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 21, 2016 17:58:20 GMT -5
I guess you need to be pretty brave to live in the land where bad guys are free to shoot good guys at will and nobody wants surveillance.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 21, 2016 18:31:36 GMT -5
Yes, an illegal alien. A Christian Brit, no less. Who couldn't get a gun legally. And Congress refused 4 times yesterday to preserve the right of people on the no-fly list to purchase assault rifles. The land of the free and the home of the brave. Refused to "preserve" or refused to "revoke?"
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jun 21, 2016 19:27:01 GMT -5
I guess you need to be pretty brave to live in the land where bad guys are free to shoot good guys at will and nobody wants surveillance. Why don't we just go back to the gunslinger days. Pack your own metal? I can see me now bent double because my sixshooter is too heavy but don't get in my way for I've a deadly eye with that sixshooter.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 21, 2016 21:06:45 GMT -5
I guess you need to be pretty brave to live in the land where bad guys are free to shoot good guys at will and nobody wants surveillance. You obviously don't know the story. He was an illegal alien, no criminal record, who couldn't purchase a gun without a criminal records check. So he tried to take the police officer's weapon to shoot Trump. Tonight he's a Christian British illegal immigrant locked up down town. Too bad he couldn't have bought an assault weapon like a normal American could. Duuhhhhh!
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jun 21, 2016 23:00:51 GMT -5
I wish Nathan's aliens were illegal...
|
|
|
Post by withlove on Jun 22, 2016 0:54:36 GMT -5
It is hard to understand that the guy who committed the Orlando atrocity could rock up to a gun shop and purchase assault rifles, ammo and the like - particularly when he'd been interviewed by FBI a couple of years back. I was listening to a program on NPR yesterday about US gun laws and the power of the NRA etc. Someone from the US can answer this but if Obama really wanted to change the laws to make it much harder to get assault rifles why couldn't he - isn't he the President? He's said a lot but why can't he do it by Presidential decree or something like that? Just a guess, but the president might fear that executive order on any type of gun control could result in a volitile response. That could also happen if it were debated and voted on by Congress, but executive orders seem to make people feel even more powerless.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 22, 2016 2:13:03 GMT -5
Sorry folks -- I made a mistake in this post. I was really wanting to be satirical with this. This is what I wanted to say Yes, an illegal alien. A Christian Brit, no less. Who despite his complete lack of any criminal past, still could notcouldn't get a gun legally in America. He needed it before they could check his credit history. Ironically Congress refused 4 times yesterday to preserve revoke the right of persons on the no-fly list to purchase assault rifles. Ergo, the stupid Brit should have at least been carrying a pocket knife (by mistake) at least once while walking through an airport
Then he wouldn't have had to try to steal the policeman's weapon at the Trump rally. Let's hear it for getting rid of criminal records checks.The land of the free and the home of the brave.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Jun 22, 2016 2:29:54 GMT -5
57+ countries Mostly Vietnam,Cuba,Middle eastern countries,Somalia,many African states and all Central and South American "BANANA" Republics,as these have all suffered from USA bullying and if no oil worse you can get #$%^&*(. Cuba of course for as Nth Korea embarassed the arrogent U.S.so their pressure of hate"not love those who despise you" is causing so much global,what are these !@#E$R%T^Y&*^&*,US,going to do next. Mexico was the last of the horrid U .S grabs for kicking out the Spanish to steal those South West States. And many countries still suffer that you stole their young adults to make wealth out of slavery, didn't you?MMMM?
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 22, 2016 5:29:48 GMT -5
It is hard to understand that the guy who committed the Orlando atrocity could rock up to a gun shop and purchase assault rifles, ammo and the like - particularly when he'd been interviewed by FBI a couple of years back. I was listening to a program on NPR yesterday about US gun laws and the power of the NRA etc. Someone from the US can answer this but if Obama really wanted to change the laws to make it much harder to get assault rifles why couldn't he - isn't he the President? He's said a lot but why can't he do it by Presidential decree or something like that? The President cannot make or change law -- that's the sole realm of the two houses of Congress -- Senate and House of Representatives. The President can use Executive Orders, but the usage is limited: From the nets -- "Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies." A better overview is on Wiki, first few paragraphs: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_orderA President can test the limits of his/her(!) Executive Order authority, but runs the risk of the order being overturned by the Courts. In the case of gun laws, any substantial executive order is certain to be immediately challenged and overturned in the courts, especially if the order is seen to contravene existing legislation or court rulings, and not least because of the varied interpretations of 2nd amendment to the Constitution--the famous "right of the people to keep and bear arms" amendment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2016 5:41:08 GMT -5
I guess you need to be pretty brave to live in the land where bad guys are free to shoot good guys at will and nobody wants surveillance. Why don't we just go back to the gunslinger days. Pack your own metal? I can see me now bent double because my sixshooter is too heavy but don't get in my way for I've a deadly eye with that sixshooter. Well you better join the line with me and have thet deadly eye fixed.
|
|
|
Post by withlove on Jun 22, 2016 7:05:15 GMT -5
It is hard to understand that the guy who committed the Orlando atrocity could rock up to a gun shop and purchase assault rifles, ammo and the like - particularly when he'd been interviewed by FBI a couple of years back. I was listening to a program on NPR yesterday about US gun laws and the power of the NRA etc. Someone from the US can answer this but if Obama really wanted to change the laws to make it much harder to get assault rifles why couldn't he - isn't he the President? He's said a lot but why can't he do it by Presidential decree or something like that? The President cannot make or change law -- that's the sole realm of the two houses of Congress -- Senate and House of Representatives. The President can use Executive Orders, but the usage is limited: From the nets -- "Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies." A better overview is on Wiki, first few paragraphs: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_orderA President can test the limits of his/her(!) Executive Order authority, but runs the risk of the order being overturned by the Courts. In the case of gun laws, any substantial executive order is certain to be immediately challenged and overturned in the courts, especially if the order is seen to contravene existing legislation or court rulings, and not least because of the varied interpretations of 2nd amendment to the Constitution--the famous "right of the people to keep and bear arms" amendment. Thanks for explaining!
|
|
|
Post by withlove on Jun 22, 2016 7:41:11 GMT -5
57+ countries Mostly Vietnam,Cuba,Middle eastern countries,Somalia,many African states and all Central and South American "BANANA" Republics,as these have all suffered from USA bullying and if no oil worse you can get #$%^&*(. Cuba of course for as Nth Korea embarassed the arrogent U.S.so their pressure of hate"not love those who despise you" is causing so much global,what are these !@#E$R%T^Y&*^&*,US,going to do next. Mexico was the last of the horrid U .S grabs for kicking out the Spanish to steal those South West States. And many countries still suffer that you stole their young adults to make wealth out of slavery, didn't you?MMMM? US citizens have been spoon-fed "we are the good guys doing noble work" propaganda. We were/are taught one-sided versions of history. Kids at the earliest stages of school were taught blind patriotism. We thought that only the bad countries (not us) did that. Even now, we have to seek out information on how we have been deceived and have caused so much hardship and destruction to the world. Slavery still happens, for example, in sweatshops. We don't take credit for the wrecking of countries who feed our drug trade. I haven't read the consumerism thread...assuming these things are discussed there. When we don't know the specifics, our eyes glaze over...sweatshop is a word we have heard without understanding. Some think poorly of Nike, without realizing that nearly every brand we know of participates in the same practices. Please remember that in general, we citizens are ignorant but not evil-intentioned. And some are waking up and trying to change. Our options are pretty limited at this point, but we are learning how to change our lifestyles, mindsets, and impact. I apologize for my country's abuses, and realize there must be more I don't know about. I welcome more education.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jun 22, 2016 7:52:30 GMT -5
Why don't we just go back to the gunslinger days. Pack your own metal? I can see me now bent double because my sixshooter is too heavy but don't get in my way for I've a deadly eye with that sixshooter. Well you better join the line with me and have thet deadly eye fixed. Back to back?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 22, 2016 18:59:14 GMT -5
57+ countries Mostly Vietnam,Cuba,Middle eastern countries,Somalia,many African states and all Central and South American "BANANA" Republics,as these have all suffered from USA bullying and if no oil worse you can get #$%^&*(. Cuba of course for as Nth Korea embarassed the arrogent U.S.so their pressure of hate"not love those who despise you" is causing so much global,what are these !@#E$R%T^Y&*^&*,US,going to do next. Mexico was the last of the horrid U .S grabs for kicking out the Spanish to steal those South West States. And many countries still suffer that you stole their young adults to make wealth out of slavery, didn't you?MMMM? US citizens have been spoon-fed "we are the good guys doing noble work" propaganda. We were/are taught one-sided versions of history. Kids at the earliest stages of school were taught blind patriotism. We thought that only the bad countries (not us) did that. Even now, we have to seek out information on how we have been deceived and have caused so much hardship and destruction to the world. Slavery still happens, for example, in sweatshops. We don't take credit for the wrecking of countries who feed our drug trade. I haven't read the consumerism thread...assuming these things are discussed there. When we don't know the specifics, our eyes glaze over...sweatshop is a word we have heard without understanding. Some think poorly of Nike, without realizing that nearly every brand we know of participates in the same practices. Please remember that in general, we citizens are ignorant but not evil-intentioned. And some are waking up and trying to change. Our options are pretty limited at this point, but we are learning how to change our lifestyles, mindsets, and impact. I apologize for my country's abuses, and realize there must be more I don't know about. I welcome more education. Follow John Oliver and you'll get quite an education on what Americans don't know about their unique virtues. Sorry, it's X-rated -- religious people will NOT like it.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 22, 2016 19:08:47 GMT -5
The President cannot make or change law -- that's the sole realm of the two houses of Congress -- Senate and House of Representatives. The President can use Executive Orders, but the usage is limited: From the nets -- "Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies." A better overview is on Wiki, first few paragraphs: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_orderA President can test the limits of his/her(!) Executive Order authority, but runs the risk of the order being overturned by the Courts. In the case of gun laws, any substantial executive order is certain to be immediately challenged and overturned in the courts, especially if the order is seen to contravene existing legislation or court rulings, and not least because of the varied interpretations of 2nd amendment to the Constitution--the famous "right of the people to keep and bear arms" amendment. Thanks Gene - that makes a lot of sense. The US Senate's failure this week to pass very minor amendments to control the sale of guns to those on the terrorist watch list is getting a fair amount of air time in Australia. Interestingly, the Dems stalled the motion by engaging in a longish filibuster (I love that word!) saying the proposals don't go far enough (which they don't). There's a study by Australian researchers from Sydney Uni that has just been published in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine which is an interesting read. The problem seems to be that Americans have nothing to learn from anyone else in the world. In fact, the most recent gun control legislation passed in Congress made it legal to purchase firearms between the states through the Internet, and who was the bill proposed by? The National Rifle Association, the mouthpiece for the weapons industry.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jun 22, 2016 19:12:21 GMT -5
The President cannot make or change law -- that's the sole realm of the two houses of Congress -- Senate and House of Representatives. The President can use Executive Orders, but the usage is limited: From the nets -- "Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies." A better overview is on Wiki, first few paragraphs: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_orderA President can test the limits of his/her(!) Executive Order authority, but runs the risk of the order being overturned by the Courts. In the case of gun laws, any substantial executive order is certain to be immediately challenged and overturned in the courts, especially if the order is seen to contravene existing legislation or court rulings, and not least because of the varied interpretations of 2nd amendment to the Constitution--the famous "right of the people to keep and bear arms" amendment. Thanks Gene - that makes a lot of sense. The US Senate's failure this week to pass very minor amendments to control the sale of guns to those on the terrorist watch list is getting a fair amount of air time in Australia. Interestingly, the Dems stalled the motion by engaging in a longish filibuster (I love that word!) saying the proposals don't go far enough (which they don't). There's a study by Australian researchers from Sydney Uni that has just been published in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine which is an interesting read. It really appears incomprehensible on the surface, when you consider that a vast majority of American voters want the government to do more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but their elected officials refuse to act on the voters' wishes. Incomprehensible until you consider that legislative action is corrupted by a lack of campaign finance reform, which, in turn, allows organisations like the National Rifle Association to have spent $31 million USD in the 2014 election cycle in political contributions, lobbying, and direct expenditures to influence the election. www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 22, 2016 21:22:04 GMT -5
Thanks Gene - that makes a lot of sense. The US Senate's failure this week to pass very minor amendments to control the sale of guns to those on the terrorist watch list is getting a fair amount of air time in Australia. Interestingly, the Dems stalled the motion by engaging in a longish filibuster (I love that word!) saying the proposals don't go far enough (which they don't). There's a study by Australian researchers from Sydney Uni that has just been published in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine which is an interesting read. It really appears incomprehensible on the surface, when you consider that a vast majority of American voters want the government to do more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but their elected officials refuse to act on the voters' wishes. Incomprehensible until you consider that legislative action is corrupted by a lack of campaign finance reform, which, in turn, allows organisations like the National Rifle Association to have spent $31 million USD in the 2014 election cycle in political contributions, lobbying, and direct expenditures to influence the election. www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082And it all goes back to the establishment that corporations are people and money is speech, and we know who where all the money is. Now guess where 10 percent of Trump's campaign expense money went -- you got it, straight into Trump Enterprises coffers, and it's not illegal.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Jun 22, 2016 23:04:55 GMT -5
Hi Withlove,Australians are kept from their slavery history. Pacific Islanders mainly Solomon Islands,young men made many families wealthy. At the closure of Slave trade in the West,they were sent home many to old to assimulate into normal family life. Our attitude mostely "I don't wanna know"
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 23, 2016 0:54:15 GMT -5
Thanks Gene - that makes a lot of sense. The US Senate's failure this week to pass very minor amendments to control the sale of guns to those on the terrorist watch list is getting a fair amount of air time in Australia. Interestingly, the Dems stalled the motion by engaging in a longish filibuster (I love that word!) saying the proposals don't go far enough (which they don't). There's a study by Australian researchers from Sydney Uni that has just been published in the prestigious American Journal of Medicine which is an interesting read. It really appears incomprehensible on the surface, when you consider that a vast majority of American voters want the government to do more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but their elected officials refuse to act on the voters' wishes. Incomprehensible until you consider that legislative action is corrupted by a lack of campaign finance reform, which, in turn, allows organisations like the National Rifle Association to have spent $31 million USD in the 2014 election cycle in political contributions, lobbying, and direct expenditures to influence the election. www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082 Hopefully, we might get some gun control now that the Democrats are doing a sit-in on the actual floor of the House & say they stay there until the Republicans do something about gun control.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 23, 2016 1:38:05 GMT -5
It really appears incomprehensible on the surface, when you consider that a vast majority of American voters want the government to do more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but their elected officials refuse to act on the voters' wishes. Incomprehensible until you consider that legislative action is corrupted by a lack of campaign finance reform, which, in turn, allows organisations like the National Rifle Association to have spent $31 million USD in the 2014 election cycle in political contributions, lobbying, and direct expenditures to influence the election. www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082 Hopefully, we might get some gun control now that the Democrats are doing a sit-in on the actual floor of the House & say they stay there until the Republicans do something about gun control.What a phoney democracy -- no one gets to vote on anything until one person decides he'll let them vote. Apparently right now Ryan intends to call a vote for Zeka virus money and then adjourn for 2 weeks. The latest twist is that the Republicans don't want anyone's name put on the no-fly list until AFTER due process has taken its course. They're doing everything imaginable to allow suspected terrorists to buy weapons -- they're insane. It's like allowing suspected child abusers to work in day care centers until some court has decided that they should be suspected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2016 15:57:44 GMT -5
Hopefully, we might get some gun control now that the Democrats are doing a sit-in on the actual floor of the House & say they stay there until the Republicans do something about gun control. What a phoney democracy -- no one gets to vote on anything until one person decides he'll let them vote. Harry Reid did the same thing in the senate just a couple years ago i didn't hear any democrats complaining then...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2016 15:58:48 GMT -5
It really appears incomprehensible on the surface, when you consider that a vast majority of American voters want the government to do more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but their elected officials refuse to act on the voters' wishes. Incomprehensible until you consider that legislative action is corrupted by a lack of campaign finance reform, which, in turn, allows organisations like the National Rifle Association to have spent $31 million USD in the 2014 election cycle in political contributions, lobbying, and direct expenditures to influence the election. www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=d000000082 Hopefully, we might get some gun control now that the Democrats are doing a sit-in on the actual floor of the House & say they stay there until the Republicans do something about gun control.your circus didn't last very long did it?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 23, 2016 16:33:23 GMT -5
What a phoney democracy -- no one gets to vote on anything until one person decides he'll let them vote. Harry Reid did the same thing in the senate just a couple years ago i didn't hear any democrats complaining then... Of course he did. That's how phoney democracies work. The bright shining beacon of democracy for the rest of the world.
|
|