Florida High School Shooting

[HomerJS]

Well this is awkward.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...ng-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221

Just so I understand this. Trump revoked a law to block mentally ill people from buying guns. This guy is mentally ill buys a gun and shoots up a school and kills students

Clearly everything is fine /s

 

[fskimospy]

Serious question. What actions did the democrats take under Obama when they actually for a period of time had the votes to do so?

The answer of course is nothing. Anyone who makes this about party is selectively blind.

I love how this is the response for every problem in the country. The Democrats had 60 votes for about four months and people want to know why they didn’t fix gun violence, climate change, health care, immigration, and the tax code. Lol. They were lucky to have enough time for one of those.

 

[UNCjigga]

Serious question. What actions did the democrats take under Obama when they actually for a period of time had the votes to do so?

The answer of course is nothing. Anyone who makes this about party is selectively blind.

Sandy Hook happened after the 2012 election, and Republicans already had control of the House in 2010. There was actually very little time when Democrats controlled everything, and they focused that time on Obamacare. Also, I'm not sure sweeping gun regulations are a priority for a first term President, as it probably destroys your chances for a second term.

Not sure which mass shootings with a ton of media coverage happened in '09 or '10?

 

[SlowSpyder]

I love how this is the response for every problem in the country. The Democrats had 60 votes for about four months and people want to know why they didn’t fix gun violence, climate change, health care, immigration, and the tax code. Lol. They were lucky to have enough time for one of those.

Guess they had bigger fish to fry than gun violence, not their priority. In that four months, what did they get passed?

 

[mdram]

Just so I understand this. Trump revoked a law to block mentally ill people from buying guns. This guy is mentally ill buys a gun and shoots up a school and kills students

Clearly everything is fine /s

that would have had no effect on this

"The rule, which was finalized in December, added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their own financial affairs to the national background check database."

 

[K1052]

I love how this is the response for every problem in the country. The Democrats had 60 votes for about four months and people want to know why they didn’t fix gun violence, climate change, health care, immigration, and the tax code. Lol. They were lucky to have enough time for one of those.

I'm not sure if you were aware but it was the responsibility of the Democrats alone to fix every neglected domestic policy issue during those four months that had piled up since the founding of the republic.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Serious question. What actions did the democrats take under Obama when they actually for a period of time had the votes to do so?

The answer of course is nothing. Anyone who makes this about party is selectively blind.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...f-the-nics-improvement-amendments-act-of-2007
That's a pretty good one. Revoked by Trump administration, unfortunately.

EDIT: Damn, @momentofsanity beat me to it.

 

[WackyDan]

Well this is awkward.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...ng-obama-era-gun-checks-people-mental-n727221

Awkward how? Awkward in that you don't understand the difference between legislation and an executive order? Awkward in that you don't even understand the article you posted?

So Obama made an EO that impacted ONLY those on social security who had someone else with power of attorney managing their money (their SS or SSI disbursements). Think about that.

Two things...

1. A lot of these people were so far over the hill they weren't about to get out of their wheel chairs, move fast in their walkers or even remember their own name so that they could buy a gun to begin with.... What threat exactly were they again? Feel good EO it is.

2. Some of these people simply weren't good at managing their own money but otherwise were fine upstanding citizens with ZERO history of mental illness. Their rights under the 2nd Amendment were violated.

Some of you treat that EO as if it truly was targeted at the mentally ill or that it was some sort of sweeping EO policy directive that impacted every citizen. Stop pretending it was.

nice try.

 

[WackyDan]

Try answering the question. You guys are in charge of everything now. What do you propose to mitigate this crisis? More do nothing??

Who me?

"You guys are in charge of everything now. "

I don't even vote Republican. Nice sweep.

 

[zinfamous]

I've concluded 2A absolutists in this thread don't give 2 shits about mass/school shootings.

They claim so called lefites don't understand the "root cause" but we have yet to hear any of their solutions besides do nothing.

It's because they never have solutions, for anything. 8+ years rattling on about how they need to fix the very bad things that very bad democrats have done....only to respond with a complete inability to do anything among themselves despite complete control. For all legislation.

This country only moves forward when republicans are removed and replaced with competent people.

 

[WackyDan]

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...f-the-nics-improvement-amendments-act-of-2007
That's a pretty good one. Revoked by Trump administration, unfortunately.

EDIT: Damn, @momentofsanity beat me to it.

Repeating this so you see it.

Awkward how? Awkward in that you don't understand the difference between legislation and an executive order? Awkward in that you don't even understand the article you posted?

So Obama made an EO that impacted ONLY those on social security who had someone else with power of attorney managing their money (their SS or SSI disbursements). Think about that.

Two things...

1. A lot of these people were so far over the hill they weren't about to get out of their wheel chairs, move fast in their walkers or even remember their own name so that they could buy a gun to begin with.... What threat exactly were they again? Feel good EO it is.

2. Some of these people simply weren't good at managing their own money but otherwise were fine upstanding citizens with ZERO history of mental illness. Their rights under the 2nd Amendment were violated.

Some of you treat that EO as if it truly was targeted at the mentally ill or that it was some sort of sweeping EO policy directive that impacted every citizen. Stop pretending it was.

nice try.

 

[WackyDan]

Just so I understand this. Trump revoked a law to block mentally ill people from buying guns. This guy is mentally ill buys a gun and shoots up a school and kills students

Clearly everything is fine /s

Clearly you don't understand what Obama's EO was about... even if left in place it wouldn't have prevented this kid from buying a weapon... Can we agree on that one?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Awkward how? Awkward in that you don't understand the difference between legislation and an executive order? Awkward in that you don't even understand the article you posted?

So Obama made an EO that impacted ONLY those on social security who had someone else with power of attorney managing their money (their SS or SSI disbursements). Think about that.

Two things...

1. A lot of these people were so far over the hill they weren't about to get out of their wheel chairs, move fast in their walkers or even remember their own name so that they could buy a gun to begin with.... What threat exactly were they again? Feel good EO it is.

2. Some of these people simply weren't good at managing their own money but otherwise were fine upstanding citizens with ZERO history of mental illness. Their rights under the 2nd Amendment were violated.

Some of you treat that EO as if it truly was targeted at the mentally ill or that it was some sort of sweeping EO policy directive that impacted every citizen. Stop pretending it was.

nice try.

You're kinda wrong.
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...f-the-nics-improvement-amendments-act-of-2007

SUMMARY:
These final rules implement provisions of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA) that require Federal agencies to provide relevant records to the Attorney General for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Under these final rules, we will identify, on a prospective basis, individuals who receive Disability Insurance benefits under title II of the Social Security Act (Act) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments under title XVI of the Act and who also meet certain other criteria, including an award of benefits based on a finding that the individual's mental impairment meets or medically equals the requirements of section 12.00 of the Listing of Impairments (Listings) and receipt of benefits through a representative payee. We will provide pertinent information about these individuals to the Attorney General on not less than a quarterly basis. As required by the NIAA, at the commencement of the adjudication process we will also notify individuals, both orally and in writing, of their possible Federal prohibition on possessing or receiving firearms, the consequences of such prohibition, the criminal penalties for violating the Gun Control Act, and the availability of relief from the prohibition on the receipt or possession of firearms imposed by Federal law. Finally, we also establish a program that permits individuals to request relief from the Federal firearms prohibitions based on our adjudication. These changes will allow us to fulfill responsibilities that we have under the NIAA.

It requires federal agencies to provide relevant records to the AG for inclusion in NICS. Those provide information on identification of DI beneficiaries, SSA/SSI beneficiaries, etc. It *also* provides information for restriction of gun ownership per federal background checks. Those two things are separate, it's just that the same information is relevant for both (if you're getting SSI coverage for a mental disability, you probably don't have business owning a firearm).

 

[HomerJS]

that would have had no effect on this

"The rule, which was finalized in December, added people receiving Social Security checks for mental illnesses and people deemed unfit to handle their own financial affairs to the national background check database."

Still waiting to hear why it was ok to allow this guy to buy an AR-15

 

[zinfamous]

Just so I understand this. Trump revoked a law to block mentally ill people from buying guns. This guy is mentally ill buys a gun and shoots up a school and kills students

Clearly everything is fine /s

It's Obamas fault that Trump revoked Obama's law aimed at preventing mentally disturbed people from buying guns. Also Hilary and gun-grabbing democrats. They're the ones that made innocent republicans vote for a monster like Trump, because they honestly had no other choice. So, again, it's the Dems fault. And Hilary and Obama.

I guarantee that Slow and boomerang, et al, agree with this argument.

 

[fskimospy]

Guess they had bigger fish to fry than gun violence, not their priority. In that four months, what did they get passed?

A reorganization of the entire American health care system, which most rational people would agree is a bigger priority. Later they attempted to address gun violence but their efforts were blocked by Republicans as usual. Republicans faced no consequences for this of course because their voters are easily duped into believing Republican success at blocking common sense gun control is somehow the fault of Democrats.

Regardless, the ‘why didn’t Democrats fix everything?’ argument is ridiculous on its face.

 

[brycejones]

Serious question. What actions did the democrats take under Obama when they actually for a period of time had the votes to do so?

The answer of course is nothing. Anyone who makes this about party is selectively blind.

If you think this is a serious question then you're pretty much dumber than a fucking rock. Look at a calendar for the time the Democrats had 60 votes in the Senate, explain how they were supposed to fix the ills of the world in that time. Also explain how in the following 9 years the GOP has done fuck all to even begin to address the issue of gun violence and then try to tell us again how this isn't about one party. Which party gets the vast majority of money from the NRA? Why do you think that is?

BTW if you don't vote Republican who do you vote for?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

nm

 

[zinfamous]

Clearly you don't understand what Obama's EO was about... even if left in place it wouldn't have prevented this kid from buying a weapon... Can we agree on that one?

You argued that democrats did nothing.

It was shown that Obama did do something. Republicans: still nothing.

You moved the golaposts.

You have no standing.

 

[WackyDan]

I love how this is the response for every problem in the country. The Democrats had 60 votes for about four months and people want to know why they didn’t fix gun violence, climate change, health care, immigration, and the tax code. Lol. They were lucky to have enough time for one of those.

I love how subtle points are lost on you.

POINT IS... Party in charge doesn't fucking matter. Shit, the 93 ban under Clinton was a win for nobody as it was strictly cosmetic and wasn't an actual ban... The gun industry and gun owners laughed the entire ten years it was in place and the gun control crowd got to do a victory dance over something that was simply symbolic.

 

[theeedude]

Republicans are in charge of the country now, let them try their solutions. If they don't work, we can throw them out and try Democrat solutions next.

 

[fskimospy]

It's Obamas fault that Trump revoked Obama's law aimed at preventing mentally disturbed people from buying guns. Also Hilary and gun-grabbing democrats. They're the ones that made innocent republicans vote for a monster like Trump, because they honestly had no other choice. So, again, it's the Dems fault. And Hilary and Obama.

I guarantee that Slow and boomerang, et al, agree with this argument.

I have seen countless variations of exactly this argument. I still remember people arguing, absolutely sincerely, that liberals were to blame for conservatives voting for Trump because liberals were mean to them. It’s something an eight year old would say.

 

[SlowSpyder]

A reorganization of the entire American health care system, which most rational people would agree is a bigger priority. Later they attempted to address gun violence but their efforts were blocked by Republicans as usual. Republicans faced no consequences for this of course because their voters are easily duped into believing Republican success at blocking common sense gun control is somehow the fault of Democrats.

Regardless, the ‘why didn’t Democrats fix everything?’ argument is ridiculous on its face.

I agree, it isn't the Dem's fault that we have gun violence (but I don't blame the Repubs either). An attempt at pushing healthcare in this country in the direction of socialism was more important to the Dems than curbing gun violence, and you agree with that. Noted.

 

[HomerJS]

Republicans are in charge of the country now, let them try their solutions. If they don't work, we can throw them out and try Democrat solutions next.

Just like 2A absolutists here. We have yet to hear them offer a solution, just repeating talking points

 

[WackyDan]

Sandy Hook happened after the 2012 election, and Republicans already had control of the House in 2010. There was actually very little time when Democrats controlled everything, and they focused that time on Obamacare. Also, I'm not sure sweeping gun regulations are a priority for a first term President, as it probably destroys your chances for a second term.

Not sure which mass shootings with a ton of media coverage happened in '09 or '10?

School shootings and mass shootings aren't anything new. Point was lost on you. Neither party has the intestinal fortitude to do shit about it. The only thing each one counts on is your vote either left or right. The issue is the same, the only thing that is different between parties is how they play you. All that does is create the stereotypes we have today of what the GOP or DNC stand for... Which is pretty much the same fucking thing. Power, greed, and manipulation....Way short on policy of any substance.