• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

POS Chuck Schumer sneaks gun legislation into Cybersecurity bill

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,458
2
0
I actually wouldn't be opposed to a 15rd limit on handguns and 30rd on rifles. . . that's actually a somewhat reasonable number that i could live with.

cops are exempted from this. so they're slowly trying to put more power into the hands of the state. pretty soon the cops will be allowed 100rd ar-15's and the citizens will only be allowed derringers
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
as expected - more of 'access to guns isn't the problem'

nothing to see here, keep heads buried in the sand...
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
Congratulations, you are now on the "useless idiot list".
I'm the idiot here...got it..

so how is this such a bad thing again?

Oh - that's right - you are a guy who has something about gun control in your signature, it's part of who you are, it's the ONLY reason you've posted 150 times in the Zimmerman thread.

What part of Schumer's proposal is so problematic again?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
I'm the idiot here...got it..

so how is this such a bad thing again?

Oh - that's right - you are a guy who has something about gun control in your signature, it's part of who you are, it's the ONLY reason you've posted 150 times in the Zimmerman thread.
My signature exemplifies the stupidity of the anti-gun mind, and how it is not capable of rational thought, only appeal to emotion, and ineffectual knee jerk reaction to an issue they do not comprehend.

Oh, and my posting int he Zimmerman thread has nothing to do with gun control, and everything to do with a man being railroaded by race baiting fools.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
12,510
3,897
136
Paranoia is such an insidious creature. In the studious care of a profiteer, it is such a marvelous pet to walk around the block.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,520
441
126
Apparently he's not as anti-gun as your link makes him out to be.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/soles.asp

However, commentaries on the shooting (like the one reproduced above) which portrayed Senator Soles as a hypocritical, virulently anti-gun legislator "who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public" are not supported by the evidence. According to Project VoteSmart, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF), the NRA political action committee that ranks political candidates based on voting records, public statements and their responses to NRA-PVF questionnaires, had assigned the following grades to Senator Soles over the previous decade:

  • 1998 - B
  • 2000 - B+
  • 2002 - B+
  • 2004 - A
  • 2006 - A
  • 2008 - A
As well, Grass Roots North Carolina (GRNC), an "organization dedicated to preserving individual rights, particularly your right to keep and bear arms" said of the criticisms of Senator Soles: An alert from a national organization not up to speed on local North Carolina political issues condemning Senator R.C. SOLES over the recent shooting at his home has been circulating recently. Part of a fund raising alert from the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) calls Soles "the most virulent anti-Second Amendment activist in the state" and the "most vociferous anti-gun zealot in North Carolina."

As much fun as it is to catch anti-gun politicians in their own hypocrisy, this is not such a case. In the interest of fair play and truth, GRNC is compelled to point out that while not excellent, R.C. Soles is not a "virulent anti-Second Amendment activist" nor a "vociferous anti-gun zealot." [T]he charges are simply not true — he is mediocre at worst and has voted with us on most major issues.​



If he was really anti-gun wouldn't the NRA be giving him C's and D's instead of A's and B's?



 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
POS Chuck Schumer sneaks gun legislation into Cybersecurity bill
Should have gone long on Ruger stock; after the Aurora shooting and now this sales are going to go through the roof. You'd figure by now that politicians favoring gun control would have learned that every time they propose legislation, several tens of thousands additional AR-15s and high-capacity magazines get bought immediately afterwards.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
My signature exemplifies the stupidity of the anti-gun mind, and how it is not capable of rational thought, only appeal to emotion, and ineffectual knee jerk reaction to an issue they do not comprehend.

Oh, and my posting int he Zimmerman thread has nothing to do with gun control, and everything to do with a man being railroaded by race baiting fools.

complete, total, and utter bullshit - if GZ had killed Martin with a knife -but the rest of the story was identical - you wouldn't have given it the time of day - and you know it.

You, by the way - are exactly like the "anti-gun mind" - just at the opposite end of the spectrum. You are not capable of rational thought on the issue either - any discussion or proposal about controlling guns and/or ammunition - and you and your ilk are out in spades. Your reaction - just as knee-jerk as Schumer's by the way - was more predictable by far, and just as ill-informed.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,458
2
0
Should have gone long on Ruger stock; after the Aurora shooting and now this sales are going to go through the roof. You'd figure by now that politicians favoring gun control would have learned that every time they propose legislation, several tens of thousands additional AR-15s and high-capacity magazines get bought immediately afterwards.

hopefully not in CA. . . sb249 gives the state the right to confiscate without compensation any gun that violates it . . . grandfathered or not
 

schneiderguy

Lifer
Jun 26, 2006
10,763
32
91
yes, the state is going to go around confiscating guns....right
They confiscated certain kinds of SKS rifles that they arbitrarily decided were illegal a couple years after the initial AWB. So it has already happened and it will again.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
nice try, NOT A SINGLE GUN WAS EVER CONFISCATED IN CALIFORNIA, California gave people a year to register guns owned before the laws changed
 
May 16, 2000
13,526
0
0
POS nazi move, will likely go down in flames. Please call your representatives.

If it DID pass I (and hundreds or thousands of others) would mortgage ourselves to our eyeballs buying thousands of high cap mags for later resale after the ban so that we'd all become rich from the law, and ensure that just as many (or more) high cap magazines were distributed to people during the time of the ban...just like last time.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,968
1,307
126
Lunatics with guns are a problem. +1
Don't forget their enablers-fanatics backed by the extreme lobbying power of the NRA who scream Chicken Little at every tiny and extremely reasonable attempt to sensibly regulate deadly weapons.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
You do realize that the OP is a druggist who bitches about the commie plot forcing him to throw contaminated waste into a separate bag....
Well Chuck, that's not quite right is it? Na, but if truth is the first casualty in a war it would be business as usual for you. I'll call you Chuck because politicians would be so proud of your dishonest nature.

Charles K, a few things. First, if I had my way tacking on legislation unrelated to any bill would not be allowed. Second, I generally don't follow abortion threads because it's not going to change. Unlike Chucks action abortion is substantially immune. Courts will jump on that where they'll let american citizens arrested in the US sit for years without their constitutional rights. Then you mention Republicans. I didn't say Democrats, I specifically mentioned Schumer who is from my state and answers to Bloomberg more than most of us here.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Charles K, a few things. First, if I had my way tacking on legislation unrelated to any bill would not be allowed. Second, I generally don't follow abortion threads because it's not going to change. Unlike Chucks action abortion is substantially immune. Courts will jump on that where they'll let american citizens arrested in the US sit for years without their constitutional rights. Then you mention Republicans. I didn't say Democrats, I specifically mentioned Schumer who is from my state and answers to Bloomberg more than most of us here.
That seems reasonable. As you know from another thread I am no fan of Schumer's. And I too am fed up with both sides attaching unrelated crap onto bills.
 

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,357
6
81
as expected - more of 'access to guns isn't the problem'

nothing to see here, keep heads buried in the sand...
Keeping law-abiding citizens away from guns is not going to stop the bad guys from getting them.

 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
complete, total, and utter bullshit - if GZ had killed Martin with a knife -but the rest of the story was identical - you wouldn't have given it the time of day - and you know it.
The case isn't driven by the gun angle, it's driven by the race angle, and I would have the exact same opinion, you are no one to tell me what I think so don't even try.

You, by the way - are exactly like the "anti-gun mind" - just at the opposite end of the spectrum. You are not capable of rational thought on the issue either - any discussion or proposal about controlling guns and/or ammunition - and you and your ilk are out in spades. Your reaction - just as knee-jerk as Schumer's by the way - was more predictable by far, and just as ill-informed.
You couldn't be more wrong. Maybe you can answer this one simple question, if you can, I will adjust my views ...

How are more laws going to stop people that by definition do not follow the law?
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,531
2
81
xjohn - again you miss the point completely, but it's not surprising anymore.

Many people are/were driven to the GZ case because of the race angle - you, however, were drawn by the gun angle - if you can't even be honest about that, why bother having a debate about anything?

Answer me this question - are you ok with the amount of gun-related violence in this country?
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,993
100
106
I bet the Obama camp is a bit pissed at Schumer at the moment. Gun control is a losing issue and most Dems have figured that out.
Damn straight. Many centrists/independents/moderate democrats do not want gun legislation to be on the table for the election. They know it is red meat for the GOP base and it is NOT a high priority for all but the most liberal wing of the democratic party. Fortunately, that wing does not control the democrats.
LOL, or bayonet lugs, don't forget the bayonet lugs
Yeah, that part was completely stupid. This is why I was glad that the old "assault weapons ban" was allowed to expire. It was a poorly crafted piece of legislation written by people who obviously don't understand or personally respect firearms.
right Xjohn, he's an ignorant POS that wants to take your guns away...right?

"“Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.

He suggested that Democrats make it clear that their goal is not to repeal the Second Amendment.

“The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.”

Schumer also pointed out that it would be reasonable for the right to recognize that background checks on those buying guns is necessary — as called for in the Brady law. He also said average Americans don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting or protect themselves.

“We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can some together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.”"

You better stock up now!!!!!
I'm generally pro-second amendment, but the background check and brief "cooling off" period for firearms purchases does make sense. We need to strengthen and streamline these systems. Instituting another assault weapons ban (even one that didn't have asinine classifications of what an assault weapon is) like the last one only serves to restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens like myself.

Sen. Schumer is right in his statement here even if I don't agree with his amendment specifically. The left/right should be able to come to a consensus on this issue. We're probably closer on that now than ever. Unfortunately in this political climate, only the right can propose anything because if the left did, you would have the NRA screaming "stockpile now before them gun-grabber deems take yer guns!".

I forsee such a compromise like this:
1) The right will support thorough background checks and brief cooling off periods for purchases
2) The left abandons all planks regarding firearm ownership databases (including the various handgun laws)
3) The left will support concealed-carry and open-carry laws on the national and state levels
4) The right agrees to some limits on high capacity magazines (say, >20 rounds or so...which would be up for debate)
5) Both sides agree that the former assault weapons ban had some really asinine criteria for classifying what an "assault weapon" was.
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
4,595
1,919
136
Lunatics with guns are a problem. +1
Except its increasingly harder to tell who is or will be a lunatic from those who aren't or will not be at the time of gun purchase.

Anyway ultimately the gun issue to me comes down to this: you either want and believe in a world without guns or you don't. Period. Its just like the recycling issue, the global warming issue, the AIDS issue, the poverty issue, and so on. You either believe in a world without these things, or you don't and say they are here to stay forever regardless of men's best intentions (and therefore why bother trying to get rid of them).

I personally believe in a world without guns, and it may be detrimental for me to own one in the short term (just like its detrimental for me to recycle in the short term, to minimize my fossil fuel useage in the short term, to give to AIDs charities in the short term and so on). However, I can't say I honestly want and believe in a world without guns and then go buy a nice magnum (and I do enjoy the thought of owning a very very nice 1K USD magnum) to keep under my bed.

There are obviously though people who don't believe in such aworld and want guns to stay permanently. But in the same vein there are also people who fought racial integration, still fight gay rights, think if you get AIDs its your own fault, think global warming is a myth, and think that recycling is a waste of time because the rapture is just around the corner and truly believe what they believe. I think that in general history consistenly favors the more compassionate humanistic view rather than the hardliners who choose only to see the worst in mankind.,
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,325
126
wow, because this gun law would be a crippling blow to the 2nd amendment, and a major pain in the ass to all the law-abiding citizens of the world....start of the slippery slope and all that stuff....err...wait...
Every last one of my detachable magazines for every last weapon I own is over 10 rounds and none of them are aftermarket or "extended". Almost all of them came with the gun when I purchased it, occasionally I buy an extra or two for the range but I always buy the same mags that came with the gun.

And what does it solve? If the aurora shooter had used 4 9+1 round semi-auto shotguns with either buck shot or slugs I guarantee the death count would be much higher. Or a few cans of gasoline or his homemade bombs in his house, or any number of things you can buy at your local hardware store.....

Batshit crazy people will find a way to do batshit crazy shit. The key to stopping them is to find out who they are before they do not limiting what non-batshit crazy people can purchase and/or own.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
xjohn - again you miss the point completely, but it's not surprising anymore.
Oh I got the point just fine'

Many people are/were driven to the GZ case because of the race angle - you, however, were drawn by the gun angle - if you can't even be honest about that, why bother having a debate about anything?
Who are you to tell me why I am interested in something? Get over yourself.

Answer me this question - are you ok with the amount of gun-related violence in this country?
It isn't "gun violence", it is violence committed by people. If you can't grasp this simple concept nothing will change.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY