General Discussion

moriah

(8,312 posts)

59. But not immediate purchase or unregulated purchase.

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 11:08 AM

Jun 2016

Way too many people feel like "shall not be infringed" means more than the rest of the amendment instead of using comon sense.

I'm from a gun owning state, have owned and am reasonably proficient with 1911 style pistols, as well as proficient with revolvers, shotguns, and non-semi rifles. But that doesn't mean I am supportive of unrestricted immediate access to firearms unless a person has a paper shield in hand, nor do I support the idiotic definition of private party seller" we currently use that allows FSM-knows-who to buy in-state on Gunslist, even if it won't stop.every gun death.

But we also need to recognize that mere cosmetics do not make a firearm in need of more regulation. There are fanatics on both sides. I feel strongly, butbI am not a fanatic either way.

Edit: Please forgive typos. It's a hazard of touchscreen use.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

97 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I don't think it's a good idea to restrict Constitutional rights based on a government watch list [View all] davidn3600 Jun 2016 OP

I'm a big fan of due process and I agree with you (nt) Nye Bevan Jun 2016 #1

Would an appeals process allow for due process? Nt moriah Jun 2016 #4

There is no apeals process. oneshooter Jun 2016 #17

If you were denied only for that reason, and told, you'd learn.... moriah Jun 2016 #18

Or possably learn by a visit from a Federal Agent..............or two. n/t oneshooter Jun 2016 #19

Yeah. And sometimes that may be needed, if they are actually *trained* properly. moriah Jun 2016 #20

Actually that's why the head of the FBI opposed using the Terror Watch List in such a way. PoliticAverse Jun 2016 #31

Maybe I just don't get that logic. But I'm weird. moriah Jun 2016 #34

I believe he is saying Lonusca Jun 2016 #93

So take the right away without due process, but give you due process to get it back? X_Digger Jun 2016 #42

If they don't own the gun yet, it's not their property, and "due process".... moriah Jun 2016 #44

It's called prior restraint. X_Digger Jun 2016 #48

The government cannot stop you from keeping your guns, or bearing them (even if there are SCOTUS ... moriah Jun 2016 #54

Too cute by half reasoning doesn't cut it. X_Digger Jun 2016 #55

But not immediate purchase or unregulated purchase. moriah Jun 2016 #59

Quick quiz: Who said, "A right delayed is a right denied." No googling. X_Digger Jun 2016 #60

If you equate the right to vote with the "right" to purchase a Sig Sauer MCX immediately... moriah Jun 2016 #65

I don't pick and choose which rights I protect. I'll leave that to republicans. X_Digger Jun 2016 #66

It was quiet enough, with loud music, that many people thought the gunshots were sound effects. moriah Jun 2016 #74

At a club pumping out 120db+ music, yes. Fucking duh. X_Digger Jun 2016 #76

I support life. moriah Jun 2016 #78

"I support life." is a platitude. We can see exactly what you support. X_Digger Jun 2016 #81

I support the right to go to a club I would have felt safe in and not get shot. Aka, life. moriah Jun 2016 #88

Oh, anyone who reads can see what you mean. Just scroll through your replies in this subthread. n/t X_Digger Jun 2016 #92

I noticed you didn't respond to my post regarding my reaction to the tragedy. moriah Jun 2016 #94

By the way, here's what I finally wrote when I could find words for Orlando. moriah Jun 2016 #89

The military version comes with a 3 position ssfety oneshooter Jun 2016 #73

I'm honestly, as I said, less familiar with modern rifles. moriah Jun 2016 #75

For many military operations oneshooter Jun 2016 #85

---> Petrushka Jun 2016 #83

Then if we aren't limited to rights guaranteed by the Constitution for this discussion.... moriah Jun 2016 #87

There is no right to due process when it comes to a privilege... scscholar Jun 2016 #79

It's a right, not a privilege whether you like it or not friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #91

On a theoretical level, I see your point. But on a real-life level, I don't know anyone MH1 Jun 2016 #2

I have been on the FAA No Fly list at least since 12/2001. Dustlawyer Jun 2016 #3

A few days ago in Orlado safeinOhio Jun 2016 #5

They would be just as dead if Mateen had used a straw buyer a la the San Bernadino... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #7

Mateen wouldn't have been prevented from buying a gun EL34x4 Jun 2016 #29

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness . . . leanforward Jun 2016 #6

Al FREAKING Gore was on a no fly list! tblue37 Jun 2016 #8

Well said. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #9

It's already a slide, my issue is the government is always trying to privatize stuff HereSince1628 Jun 2016 #10

I ain't taking your bait. trumad Jun 2016 #11

I guess that's one way to evade debate wen you can't justify your stance. Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #12

No I just evade debating gun humpers. trumad Jun 2016 #13

A wise move, if one has no logical response friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #22

A wise move since one hates to debate morans. trumad Jun 2016 #24

You should learn to be more tolerant, I debate the half-clever who use eye speech... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #26

Tolerant of gun humpers... trumad Jun 2016 #35

Why not? I tolerate knee-jerk bigots, and even engage in conversation with them... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #67

Don't tolerate them either trumad Jun 2016 #70

That must make it difficult to look in a mirror, as I have seen nothing *but*... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #71

Hillarious sarisataka Jun 2016 #27

There is a reason guns control is a smoking wreck in America hack89 Jun 2016 #32

If you're going to define all "pro-gunners" as "morans", then you've just said "one hates to debate" Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #49

Jury results: Auggie Jun 2016 #56

No, same reason we ignore idiotic GOP voters, not worth the effort. nt Logical Jun 2016 #43

You are not an objective poster. nt Logical Jun 2016 #72

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #40

Imagine if a southern state or Trunp admin formed a "vote fraud watch list" Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #14

Why stretch? Igel Jun 2016 #15

Vote fraud is small potatos sarisataka Jun 2016 #25

That's true- wait till someone on assistance commits some terrorist act Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #28

I agree. geomon666 Jun 2016 #16

Then let the courts decide brentspeak Jun 2016 #21

you know that the "slippery slope" is a FALLACY, right? maxsolomon Jun 2016 #23

Well then... I guess it's OK for the GOP to limit the voting rights of minorities then? davidn3600 Jun 2016 #38

yes. that's exactly what i meant. maxsolomon Jun 2016 #39

Yelling fire in a crowded theatre is not illegal. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #45

ok, then. libel. maxsolomon Jun 2016 #95

Libel is a civil tort - and at its core requires a false statement. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #96

yes,anyone with a desire for an assault weapon should be denied and watched, absolutely swhisper1 Jun 2016 #30

I'm a white middle-aged man. I do business around the world. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #33

Some may not like the reference felix_numinous Jun 2016 #36

It won't get struck down, you just get a hearing Drahthaardogs Jun 2016 #37

We have folks still alive who remember Nixon, McCarthy, and J Edgar Hoover X_Digger Jun 2016 #41

Yeah. librarylu Jun 2016 #86

You need to have a hearing, some sort of due process. uppityperson Jun 2016 #46

im only in my 30's beergood Jun 2016 #47

Well buying a military grade weapon shouldn't be a constitutional right so it all evens out... n/t leeroysphitz Jun 2016 #50

It depends on who is in power....if we're in control we can ensure the right people get on the list. ileus Jun 2016 #51

the Constitution started being shredded by Nixon's DEA and it was set afire by the Enabling Act of hobbit709 Jun 2016 #52

It would e better to stem the flow of arms to mass murderers at the start by baldguy Jun 2016 #53

No, guns need to be licensed and insured like cars. alarimer Jun 2016 #57

While I like the idea of insurance on gun owners Wayburn Jun 2016 #84

Then the solution is to repeal the 2nd Amendment Orrex Jun 2016 #58

What other parts of the Bill of Rights do you want to abolish "to keep us safe"? Odin2005 Jun 2016 #63

Which other amendment's used to justify the purchase of semi-automatic murder weapons? Orrex Jun 2016 #64

That's not an answer to the question asked- but you knew that already... friendly_iconoclast Jun 2016 #68

"secret Lists" are never a good thing. Why not simply ban sales of military grade weaponry? -nt- NorthCarolina Jun 2016 #61

The number of DUers who are now OK with the terror watch list is frightening. Odin2005 Jun 2016 #62

I remember when it was virginia mountainman Jun 2016 #69

All I really want is for the people on the list to have a delay while due process straightens out... moriah Jun 2016 #77

This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #80

Basing allowed sales on a greatly flawed list isn't a great idea. SeattleVet Jun 2016 #82

The keepers of thee watch lists probably aren't too eager to share either. JVS Jun 2016 #90

I don't think so, either. Iggo Jun 2016 #97