Trump back in step with NRA after doubts over Parkland shooting

[underlordcthulhu]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 

Like all trolls, you can't remember what you've posted before.

I'm really starting to think you're just confused at this point or possibly miscommunication on someone's part here. And apologies if it's on my part.

I am not against the civil rights movement. I don't know how to make that any more clear.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 Says the person who is so condescending towards black people he stated that proper gun control, such as licencing and training, would discriminate against black people because they couldn't afford it!

 

Not all black people in America are dirt poor, and many white people are!

 

I love the selective outrage from liberals. 

 

Requiring an ID to vote, which is a constitutionally protected? OMG RACIST IT EFFECTS THE POOR AND PEOPLE OF COLOR OMG!!

 

Requiring mandatory training and licensing to own a constitutionally protected item?  OMG HOW DARE YOU CONDESCEND BLACK PEOPLE THEY ARENT ALL POOR!!

[7by7]

Just now, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

I love the selective outrage from liberals. 

 

Requiring an ID to vote, which is a constitutionally protected? OMG RACIST IT EFFECTS THE POOR AND PEOPLE OF COLOR OMG!!

 

Requiring mandatory training and licensing to own a constitutionally protected item?  OMG HOW DARE YOU CONDESCEND BLACK PEOPLE THEY ARENT ALL POOR!!

 It is you who called such measures racist as they discriminated against black people; not I.

 

Saying the second was racist because black people couldn't afford it!

 

I love the selective memory of the ultra right wing.

[The manic]

On 5/5/2018 at 8:45 PM, Basil B said:

Trump says:

and he still want to come to London??? 

 

over 50 murders so far in London this year, but at least we are doing something about it, and it is illegal to carry a knife on the streets in the UK without good cause. and people have been sent to prison for doing so, so 50 murders in our capitol on day 125 of 2018, last year one man in the USA murdered 58 people and injured over 500 hundred overs in less than 15 minutes. 

 

60..and that's just London and that's knife  deaths, not injuries, gang rapes, violent crime, acid attacks, punishment beatings,vehicular homicide and house breaking with torture. We need a 2nd Amendment in the UK.

[farcanell]

30 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Good god man just look up Kanye West and Candice Owens. 

 

You might understand whats going on here. 

 

20 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

No need.

 

But they would not be able to express their views were it not for the civil rights movement. 

Lmao....you should have looked 

 

kayne is the guy who claimed slavery was a choice

he claimed bill Cosby was innocent

in 2013 he went on air with an anti Semitic rant

he is a tweet supporter of Owens.

and... he’s a Christian

 

owens claimed that the Boston tea party (who’s action arguably galvanized American colonials into actions that resulted in the revolution... and the US constitution... and ultimately, in the second amendment, and freedom of speech) was “bat s.h.I.t. crazy”

 

after reading both profiles, I am completely confused as to how mentioning these two people bolsters any sane argument, other than freedom of speech means that you can say whatever you want, regardless of its truth or it’s impact on society in general.

 

oh... duh... I see.... yes it was a complete waste of time... good call 7by7

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 It is you who called such measures racist as they discriminated against black people; not I.

 

Saying the second was racist because black people couldn't afford it!

 

I love the selective memory of the ultra right wing.

 

LOL I know what I typed and if you would have been paying attention you would know that this is liberal/democrat logic being thrown right back at you guys, and it is very effective. 

 

The fact is that such a federal law would never, ever happen for a multitude of reasons including disproportionaltey effecting minorities. The ACLU would be the first one out of the gate to shoot it down. It is effectively saying that people of time and means are the only ones eligible to legal self defense. No matter how ridiculous you think it is, its the truth. You cant have anything both ways when dealing with constitutionally protected things. Laws must be passed that are balanced for everyone.

 

https://www.aclu.org/blog/disability-rights/gun-control-laws-should-be-fair

 

PS, you seem extremely confused by todays social justice and the 60's era civil rights movement. 

 

Double PS, the Civil Rights act had more republican support than democrat support. 

[farcanell]

17 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

I love the selective outrage from liberals. 

 

Requiring an ID to vote, which is a constitutionally protected? OMG RACIST IT EFFECTS THE POOR AND PEOPLE OF COLOR OMG!!

 

Requiring mandatory training and licensing to own a constitutionally protected item?  OMG HOW DARE YOU CONDESCEND BLACK PEOPLE THEY ARENT ALL POOR!!

This rant really needs more of an explaination than a screamed exclamation.... (your responsive words are all caps... that’s screaming, right?)

 

surely, to vote, you need ID, to prove your citizenship, as a minimum (right to vote). Are you saying that black people don’t have ID... or that poor people don’t have ID?

 

and how on earth is requiring training to own a gun, conscending to either black people or poor people?

 

selective outrage... OYG!... LOL

[Slip]

23 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

What about the people that cant afford your expensive training and licensing? 

 

Do the rights not apply to them?

The NRA could repurpose itself to offer free training and certification for all, or even just those who are economically disadvantaged, whatever their race.  If they did that they would actually be offering some value to society.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, farcanell said:

surely, to vote, you need ID, to prove your citizenship, as a minimum (right to vote).

 

You don't pay attention to American Politics do you? Some states yes, and some states no. Firmly democrat held states with huge populations do not require a photo ID to vote and they scream racism from the hilltops at any legislation aimed at making it so. 

 

4 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Are you saying that black people don’t have ID... or that poor people don’t have ID?

 

This is the Democrat argument against voter ID laws. It disproportionately effects the poor and minorities. 

 

So again, if it can be held from Democrats that ID laws are racist, you can be sure the same will apply to firearms. 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, Slip said:

The NRA could repurpose itself to offer free training and certification for all, or even just those who are economically disadvantaged, whatever their race.  If they did that they would actually be offering some value to society.

 

The NRA already does this, genius. 

[farcanell]

23 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

You don't pay attention to American Politics do you? Some states yes, and some states no. Firmly democrat held states with huge populations do not require a photo ID to vote and they scream racism from the hilltops at any legislation aimed at making it so. 

 

 

This is the Democrat argument against voter ID laws. It disproportionately effects the poor and minorities. 

 

So again, if it can be held from Democrats that ID laws are racist, you can be sure the same will apply to firearms. 

Good... good... the beginnings of an explaination

 

no, I don’t pay attention to the minutiae of US domestic politics, which is why I’m seeking clarification.

 

but... despite democrates crying foul, how does requiring identification or gun training disenfranchise blacks folk or poor people... how can that be right... how can requiring that all of “we the people” have proper identification, be racist

 

with the frenzy about undocumented and illegals... and terrorism.... surely any sane citizen would agree that every citizen should be required to have ID.

 

i totally fail in understanding how anyone can promote the purchase and use of a weopons, without producing ID...

 

Edit... just checked... voter id is simply a form of official ID.... again, surely every citizen has this... or should, for various reasons, not just related to guns or voting.

 

Edited May 7, 2018 by farcanell

[Slip]

7 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

The NRA already does this, genius. 

Then what was your point? You say that expensive training and licensing would be racist, and then say it is already being offered free by the NRA.  Your flame doesn't bother me one bit, but reflects poorly on your ability to argue your case.

 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

2 minutes ago, Slip said:

Then what was your point? You say that expensive training and licensing would be racist, and then say it is already being offered free by the NRA.  Your flame doesn't bother me one bit, but reflects poorly on your ability to argue your case.

 

I never said that training and licensing are offered by the NRA. You asked if they could "repurpose themselves" to offer training to people who are economically disadvantaged, whatever the race, so as to offer something to society, and I said they already do exactly this. They spend millions doing precisely that. 

 

Forgive me for not noticing the straw man you were trying to construct.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

I love the selective outrage from liberals. 

 

Requiring an ID to vote, which is a constitutionally protected? OMG RACIST IT EFFECTS THE POOR AND PEOPLE OF COLOR OMG!!

 

Requiring mandatory training and licensing to own a constitutionally protected item?  OMG HOW DARE YOU CONDESCEND BLACK PEOPLE THEY ARENT ALL POOR!!

Ok, since you are obsessed with this BS about voter ID laws, let me give you my limited experience with the subject. 

 

I went to renew my drivers license a few years ago.  In my state the drivers license is an acceptable ID for voting, but the Republican governor and legislature in my state had come up with proof of ID laws for a drivers license so stringent that I had to bring multiple ID's and official correspondence addressed to my name and the address on my ID's.  However my city's government had screwed up, in some maps and listing my street was listed as an avenue, in others in was listed as a drive.  This had never caused a problem in my receiving mail, but it nearly cost me my license and my right to vote.  Only because I had been at this address for over a decade and had so much mail with both "Drive" and "Ave" on the address was I allowed to get my drivers license and allowed to vote.

 

So, because the city had a minor bureaucratic screw up, I was very nearly denied my right to vote in spite of having a birth certificate, passport, retired military ID and lots of correspondence addressed to me.  Had I not lived at the same address for many years, I probably would have been denied the license and right to vote.  Making this extra ironic, my birth certificate showed I had been born in a hospital less than ten miles from the license registration center.

 

So, while I am not opposed to reasonable voter ID laws, I am opposed to voter ID laws that are so restrictive as to prevent people from voting, as those in my state certainly do.  My objections have nothing to do with race, they have everything to do with the right to vote. 

 

You clearly are in favor of laws that prevent legal citizens from voting, but object to requiring people to demonstrate they can safely use a deadly weapon before they are allowed to purchase one.  That says a lot about you.

 

Edit:  The state I am a resident of is Florida, the largest swing state in the US.  Keeping just a small number of people from voting can have a big impact on national elections.  Tens of thousands of Puerto Ricans have moved to Florida following the devastation caused by hurricane Maria.  These people are US citizens and are now legal Florida residents.  No doubt Florida's ridiculously restrictive voter ID laws will prevent a great many of them from voting in the upcoming election.  That should put a smile on the face of undemocratic conservatives.

Edited May 7, 2018 by heybruce

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

The NRA already does this, genius. 

So why are you saying black people can't afford training?

[Slip]

4 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

I never said that training and licensing are offered by the NRA. You asked if they could "repurpose themselves" to offer training to people who are economically disadvantaged, whatever the race, so as to offer something to society, and I said they already do exactly this. They spend millions doing precisely that. 

 

Forgive me for not noticing the straw man you were trying to construct.

That's quite some knot you've tied yourself into there.  I think my meaning was quite clear- The NRA could undertake to offer the training and certification free to those who could not afford it, thus the racism you are trying to claim would not be present.  Read it again if you aren't sure.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

14 minutes ago, farcanell said:

but... despite democrates crying foul, how does requiring identification or gun training disenfranchise blacks folk or poor people... how can that be right... how can requiring that all of “we the people” have proper identification, be racist

 

with the frenzy about undocumented and illegals... and terrorism.... surely any sane citizen would agree that every citizen should be required to have ID.

 

Congratulations. You have just been baptized by Democrat insanity. Why do you think the ridiculousness of Trumps border wall has so much traction? Its not because republicans are racist, its because of unfettered illegal immigration combined with democrat refusal to things like voter ID in their giant states full of illegal immigrants. You will see liberals claim that there isnt any "evidence" of illegal voting, and this is the justification. 

 

17 minutes ago, farcanell said:

i totally fail in understanding how anyone can promote the purchase and use of a weopons, without producing ID...

 

You need an ID to buy a gun and you must pass an NICS background check in all states when buying from a dealer, but in some states you can buy a gun person to person with neither as long as the 2 parties are residents of the same state. Its called a Private Sale. 

[UncleTouchyFingers]

11 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Ok, since you are obsessed with this BS about voter ID laws, let me give you my limited experience with the subject. 

 

I went to renew my drivers license a few years ago.  In my state the drivers license is an acceptable ID for voting, but the Republican governor and legislature in my state had come up with proof of ID laws for a drivers license so stringent that I had to bring multiple ID's and official correspondence addressed to my name and the address on my ID's.  However my city's government had screwed up, in some maps and listing my street was listed as an avenue, in others in was listed as a drive.  This had never caused a problem in my receiving mail, but it nearly cost me my license and my right to vote.  Only because I had been at this address for over a decade and had so much mail with both "Drive" and "Ave" on the address was I allowed to get my drivers license and allowed to vote.

 

So, because the city had a minor bureaucratic screw up, I was very nearly denied my right to vote in spite of having a birth certificate, passport, retired military ID and lots of correspondence addressed to me.  Had I not lived at the same address for many years, I probably would have been denied the license and right to vote.  Making this extra ironic, my birth certificate showed I had been born in a hospital less than ten miles from the license registration center.

 

So, while I am not opposed to reasonable voter ID laws, I am opposed to voter ID laws that are so restrictive as to prevent people from voting, as those in my state certainly do.  My objections have nothing to do with race, they have everything to do with the right to vote. 

 

You clearly are in favor of laws that prevent legal citizens from voting, but object to requiring people to demonstrate they can safely use a deadly weapon before they are allowed to purchase one.  That says a lot about you.

 

Edit:  The state I am a resident of is Florida, the largest swing state in the US.  Keeping just a small number of people from voting can have a big impact on national elections.  Tens of thousands of Puerto Ricans have moved to Florida following the devastation caused by hurricane Maria.  These people are US citizens and are now legal Florida residents.  No doubt Florida's ridiculously restrictive voter ID laws will prevent a great many of them from voting in the upcoming election.  That should put a smile on the face of undemocratic conservatives.

 

Hey fellow Floridian.

 

Thats the difference between you and me. I value the sanctity of the vote, and didn't mind at all getting the gold star on my Florida drivers license and having a "REAL ID". The fact that its a swing state chock-a-block full of illegal immigrants just hammers home the importance of making sure only people eligible to vote are voting. Sorry you had such a hard time but I didnt at all. Just looked on their website and brought all the required paperwork. Even got my Class A & Motorcycle endorsements transferred over. Those people inconvenienced by the REAL ID act and complaining about their vote must not care about ensuring not only the safety of other drivers but voters too. 

 

https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/real-id/

 

I am in favor of everyone having a legitimate ID, ensuring the sanctity of the vote, and making sure all people are equally ensured the right to defend themselves. Thats me, and I have no problem being judged on it. 

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, The manic said:

60..and that's just London and that's knife  deaths, not injuries, gang rapes, violent crime, acid attacks, punishment beatings,vehicular homicide and house breaking with torture. We need a 2nd Amendment in the UK.

The number of deaths in London is high but only about 50% are stabbings, and the Met says it is doing something about... 

Quote

 

More than 60 people have been killed in the capital this year - of which about half were the result of stabbings.

A former Met Police Superintendent, Leroy Logan, said the "growing crisis" had seen "younger and younger people" being groomed by negative peer groups and gangs.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44026796

 

Fact is our politicians and law enforcement are trying to do something to reduce the problem, Trump is trying to divert attention from his own problems by trying to say there are bigger problems in the UK and France.

[farcanell]

7 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Congratulations. You have just been baptized by Democrat insanity. Why do you think the ridiculousness of Trumps border wall has so much traction? Its not because republicans are racist, its because of unfettered illegal immigration combined with democrat refusal to things like voter ID in their giant states full of illegal immigrants. You will see liberals claim that there isnt any "evidence" of illegal voting, and this is the justification. 

 

 

You need an ID to buy a gun and you must pass an NICS background check in all states when buying from a dealer, but in some states you can buy a gun person to person with neither as long as the 2 parties are residents of the same state. Its called a Private Sale. 

Ok... I understand the private sale thing. But.... imo... that’s just stupid. Mind you, I believe ownership of a gun should require registration of said gun... but hey ho, no wonder there is so much call for reform

 

thats said, is this about democratic insanity, or about wether or not it’s racist, which was what I was asking... how is requiring ID racist?

 

drivers licences are official docs... hell.... gun licenses are official docs (my gun license has the same number as my DL)... so again, surely every citizen has some form of official ID.... even if it’s to claim welfare.

 

for national security, as a minimum, I’d should be a minumum

[The manic]

Just now, Basil B said:

The number of deaths in London is high but only about 50% are stabbings, and the Met says it is doing something about... 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44026796

 

Fact is our politicians and law enforcement are trying to do something to reduce the problem, Trump is trying to divert attention from his own problems by trying to say there are bigger problems in the UK and France.

When it comes to our useless police and cowardly politicians they as as much use as a drum kit for Ann Frank. Decriminlising drugs would reduce many crime and  legitimise stop and search for weapons.

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Hey fellow Floridian.

 

Thats the difference between you and me. I value the sanctity of the vote, and didn't mind at all getting the gold star on my Florida drivers license and having a "REAL ID". The fact that its a swing state chock-a-block full of illegal immigrants just hammers home the importance of making sure only people eligible to vote are voting. Sorry you had such a hard time but I didnt at all. Just looked on their website and brought all the required paperwork. Even got my Class A & Motorcycle endorsements transferred over. Those people inconvenienced by the REAL ID act and complaining about their vote must not care about ensuring not only the safety of other drivers but voters too. 

 

https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/real-id/

 

I am in favor of everyone having a legitimate ID, ensuring the sanctity of the vote, and making sure all people are equally ensured the right to defend themselves. Thats me, and I have no problem being judged on it. 

You are intentionally missing the point.  People who have not lived at the same address for years, people who live at the same address but don't receive official correspondence there, people who use a PO box, people who have lost documents in a hurricane, etc., will find it difficult or impossible to vote in Florida, even if they have the legal right to do so.

 

This is a drastic solution to a non-existent problem; people are being prevented from voting even though there is no evidence of a problem with voter fraud.  The Florida voter ID laws are meant to put forth hurdles for new voters.

 

Here's where the total BS of the laws becomes apparent; there is nothing in Florida's laws that would prevent an affluent retiree with a summer home somewhere else and a winter home in Florida from registering to vote in both states.   Apparently Republicans aren't concerned with affluent retirees committing voter fraud, they just want to make it difficult for young people and new residents to vote.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

5 minutes ago, farcanell said:

or about wether or not it’s racist, which was what I was asking... how is requiring ID racist?

 

The democrats claim that its a tool that republicans are trying to use as a way to exclude certain minority groups from voting, because statistically minority groups typically vote democrat. They argue that republicans know this, and that we are targeting them, racially or demographically. Thats the short answer. They say this but fail to mention that there are tons of white people in poverty as well. And fail to acknowledge the 15 million illegal immigrants too. 

 

9 minutes ago, farcanell said:

so again, surely every citizen has some form of official ID.... even if it’s to claim welfare.

 

You do not need an official ID to claim welfare. 

 

12 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Ok... I understand the private sale thing. But.... imo... that’s just stupid.

 

I disagree. Firearm transfers and background checks cost money.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You are intentionally missing the point.  People who have not lived at the same address for years, people who live at the same address but don't receive official correspondence there, people who use a PO box, people who have lost documents in a hurricane, etc., will find it difficult or impossible to vote in Florida, even if they have the legal right to do so.

 

This is a drastic solution to a non-existent problem; people are being prevented from voting even though there is no evidence of a problem with voter fraud.  The Florida voter ID laws are meant to put forth hurdles for new voters.

 

Here's where the total BS of the laws becomes apparent; there is nothing in Florida's laws that would prevent an affluent retiree with a summer home somewhere else and a winter home in Florida from registering to vote in both states.   Apparently Republicans aren't concerned with affluent retirees committing voter fraud, they just want to make it difficult for young people and new residents to vote.

 

Im not missing the point, I am refusing to acknowledge your argument as an actual reason to not have Voter ID. I do not agree that its meant to put "hurdles" on new voters. They are meant to put "hurdles" on illegal immigrant drivers, voters, and identity theft. You are spinning it your way. 

 

I didn't have any problem whatsoever getting my ID, and like you my living situation was complicated due to travel and living overseas. They actually took a written and signed letter from my parents and their utility bills. 

[Basil B]

24 minutes ago, The manic said:

When it comes to our useless police and cowardly politicians they as as much use as a drum kit for Ann Frank. Decriminlising drugs would reduce many crime and  legitimise stop and search for weapons.

Sorry but decriminalising drugs is not the answer, see to many addicts who are a drain on public resources and probably never contributed to and certainly will never in the future. 

[BuriramSam]

On 5/5/2018 at 3:34 AM, MajarTheLion said:

OK, I'll bite. If gun control advocates care about our children so much, why are they going after *assault weapons*, one of the smallest means of homicide in the US? Let's start there. However, I reserve the right to bring up car accidents for further disputing of your reality you appear to live in.

Oh come now, you know why. They are going for assault weapons for now. We already know that won't put a dent in homicide statistics. After that, gun grabbers will say, "see, we need to ban more weapons. An assault weapons ban isn't enough!" Total confiscation is their goal.

[BuriramSam]

2 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Sorry but decriminalising drugs is not the answer, see to many addicts who are a drain on public resources and probably never contributed to and certainly will never in the future. 

The Libertarian in me says legalize drugs. As to your concern, I think that's easy to address. Drug addicts shouldn't qualify for public services. Let a few rot in the street and the rest will figure it out.

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Im not missing the point, I am refusing to acknowledge your argument as an actual reason to not have Voter ID. I do not agree that its meant to put "hurdles" on new voters. They are meant to put "hurdles" on illegal immigrant drivers, voters, and identity theft. You are spinning it your way. 

 

I didn't have any problem whatsoever getting my ID, and like you my living situation was complicated due to travel and living overseas. They actually took a written and signed letter from my parents and their utility bills. 

These laws are putting hurdles on exercising the right to vote, in spite of absence of evidence that there is a problem with illegal voting.  You are also comparing your long-established situation with those who are new to the state but still have the right to vote, a right they may be denied.

 

Back on topic, you are also ignoring the fact that guns are dangerous by design, and people should be required to demonstrate they can use them safely and competently before being allowed to own one.

[heybruce]

6 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Sorry but decriminalising drugs is not the answer, see to many addicts who are a drain on public resources and probably never contributed to and certainly will never in the future. 

So you think it's better to lock these addicts up at a tremendous cost to the taxpayers?

 

In most states the annual cost per prisoner is many times the annual cost per student in public school.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

These laws are putting hurdles on exercising the right to vote, in spite of absence of evidence that there is a problem with illegal voting.  You are also comparing your long-established situation with those who are new to the state but still have the right to vote, a right they may be denied.

 

Back on topic, you are also ignoring the fact that guns are dangerous by design, and people should be required to demonstrate they can use them safely and competently before being allowed to own one.

 

While it may put hurdles on some people in some situations, that isnt the intent and you know it. 

 

I know they are dangerous by design, but there is case law, supreme court rulings and the second amendment to get through to do such a thing. How do you plan on getting through all that?