Slippery Slope Time

Slippery Slope Time (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TricklessMagic -> Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 4:28:51 PM)
Youtube record of conversation between New Jersey traitors http://www.examiner.com/video/confiscation-nj-senators-caught-mocking-gun-owners-committee http://www.examiner.com/article/open-mike-reveals-n-j-senators-contempt-for-gun-owners-confiscation-goal --- Actual article Oh blessed be the great father for this gift to catch the lying contemptuous scum saying the word "confiscate." Ah now we never, the Americans, never have to negotiate because the reality is the more we negotiate, the more the traitor scum will seek to take. There are those who say the "slippery slope" is a lie but now we see it for the truth it is. Traitors can't be trusted. Now I know some will say things like "well the government hasn't actually confiscated guns" ignoring the concept of confiscation by operation of law (i.e. New York, D.C., Chicago, California, etc.) as though it were some legitimate omission, and some will be honest and say "well I hate guns, there shouldn't be any anyways" and I applaud their honesty if they open with that (some folks don't till they are pushed to the wall of reality where they are shown to be either liars or fools). But now we see it plain as day. The traitors can't be trusted, they can't be negotiated with, we must seek to peacefully marginalize them and organize against them.

DomKen -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 4:57:56 PM)
Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position.

TricklessMagic -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:00:54 PM)
So you're going to ignore that whole slippery slope thing? quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position.

Politesub53 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:08:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic So you're going to ignore that whole slippery slope thing? No more than you have ignored Kens point. There is an issue the pro gun lobbyists need to address and the majority of Americans support a new look at gun controls. Words like "traitors" and "slippery slope" are at best fear mongering.

Owner59 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:08:18 PM)
Yup...... No one is taking your guns.................or suggesting it. If someone is, weren`t legally supposed to have them in the 1st place.

DomKen -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:09:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic So you're going to ignore that whole slippery slope thing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery-slope_fallacy#The_slippery_slope_as_fallacy

TricklessMagic -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:11:21 PM)
So the usual suspects have arrived and they haven't disappointed ha ha ha

Politesub53 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:14:39 PM)
Blame yourself for tripping my bullshit detector. [;)]

Kirata -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:17:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 the majority of Americans support a new look at gun controls. It might surprise many in the media that gun control/gun violence is still only the top issue for just 3% of Americans... When asked to provide a solution that the federal government could implement that would prevent shootings like Newtown, only 9% wanted a ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines and clips, although another 16% said they want more gun control in general. The most popular answer at 21% was that the federal government shouldn’t get involved at all, followed by 20% who want more security in schools. Only 7% suggested more background checks, even though that tends to be the most popular answer when asked in other polling.~Source Reason Rupe Poll [complete] K.

Owner59 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:19:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TricklessMagic So the usual suspects have arrived and they haven't disappointed ha ha ha Why should anyone discuss your faux-news fed fantasies seriously? And who`s fault is it if they don`t?

Owner59 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:22:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 the majority of Americans support a new look at gun controls. It might surprise many in the media that gun control/gun violence is still only the top issue for just 3% of Americans... When asked to provide a solution that the federal government could implement that would prevent shootings like Newtown, only 9% wanted a ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines and clips, although another 16% said they want more gun control in general. The most popular answer at 21% was that the federal government shouldn’t get involved at all, followed by 20% who want more security in schools. Only 7% suggested more background checks, even though that tends to be the most popular answer when asked in other polling.~Source Reason Rupe Poll [complete] K. Yeah, we heard the faux-news spin...... Doesn`t mean that most folks didn`t want background checks.....

Politesub53 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:24:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 the majority of Americans support a new look at gun controls. It might surprise many in the media that gun control/gun violence is still only the top issue for just 3% of Americans... When asked to provide a solution that the federal government could implement that would prevent shootings like Newtown, only 9% wanted a ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines and clips, although another 16% said they want more gun control in general. The most popular answer at 21% was that the federal government shouldn’t get involved at all, followed by 20% who want more security in schools. Only 7% suggested more background checks, even though that tends to be the most popular answer when asked in other polling.~Source Reason Rupe Poll [complete] K. As I was saying. http://www.salon.com/2013/01/31/no_really_americans_support_gun_control/

subrob1967 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:24:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position. You DO realize that asking a felon if he owns a gun is unconstitutional... Right? So the argument that "moderate gun control measures like universal background checks" are not going to stop criminals from obtaining guns, and thanks to 1968's Haynes v. U.S. decision makes ALL background checks illegal.

DomKen -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:39:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position. You DO realize that asking a felon if he owns a gun is unconstitutional... Right? So the argument that "moderate gun control measures like universal background checks" are not going to stop criminals from obtaining guns, and thanks to 1968's Haynes v. U.S. decision makes ALL background checks illegal. Wrong. Haynes says you can't make a felon incriminate himself by registering a firearm. It says dick all about a background check being required before a firearm can be transferred.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 5:47:54 PM)
Noticed that did you? Idle speculation makes me wonder how many of the foaming-at-the-mouth irrational 'gun nuts' are actually internet false flags? Right out of the Alinsky/Ailes playbook... quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position.

Real0ne -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 7:56:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position. what part the word "infringe" [shall not] do you not understand ken?

subrob1967 -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 10:16:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position. You DO realize that asking a felon if he owns a gun is unconstitutional... Right? So the argument that "moderate gun control measures like universal background checks" are not going to stop criminals from obtaining guns, and thanks to 1968's Haynes v. U.S. decision makes ALL background checks illegal. Wrong. Haynes says you can't make a felon incriminate himself by registering a firearm. It says dick all about a background check being required before a firearm can be transferred. So in Chicago a felon admitting he's a felon on a 4473 is non incriminating? When did it become legal to lie on a federal background check? Or are you admitting that criminals are going to ignore 4473's in the pursuit of transferring a gun, and that even more stringent laws are moot? Is that what you're really trying to say?

LafayetteLady -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 10:21:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position. You DO realize that asking a felon if he owns a gun is unconstitutional... Right? So the argument that "moderate gun control measures like universal background checks" are not going to stop criminals from obtaining guns, and thanks to 1968's Haynes v. U.S. decision makes ALL background checks illegal. Actually, it isn't. If a felon is on parole, they are subject to drop by visits and searches at any time, and there is no "illegal search and seizure" that will apply. They can be asked if they own a gun, if they have had a drop of alcohol, did a single drug, was around anyone who did those things, and be subjected to drug testing at the whim of their parole officers.

DomKen -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/10/2013 10:54:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Yeah you're not being equally contemtuous of them by calling the traitors. It's past time to realize that when actual gun people, like myself, proposed some pretty mild regulations, universal background checks on firearm transfers and a high capacity magazine ban, that going ape shit opposing those means that when the gun control guys do finally win, and they are going to win the people and money is on their side, the restrictions are going to be harsher because you guys gave up any reasonable negotiating position. You DO realize that asking a felon if he owns a gun is unconstitutional... Right? So the argument that "moderate gun control measures like universal background checks" are not going to stop criminals from obtaining guns, and thanks to 1968's Haynes v. U.S. decision makes ALL background checks illegal. Wrong. Haynes says you can't make a felon incriminate himself by registering a firearm. It says dick all about a background check being required before a firearm can be transferred. So in Chicago a felon admitting he's a felon on a 4473 is non incriminating? When did it become legal to lie on a federal background check? Or are you admitting that criminals are going to ignore 4473's in the pursuit of transferring a gun, and that even more stringent laws are moot? Is that what you're really trying to say? The point is the felon can lie on the form. It doesn't matter the background check will catch it. As happens hundreds of times a year.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Slippery Slope Time (5/11/2013 2:24:21 AM)
I just read a summary of this case. Since a felon is prohibited from owning a gun, if they lie on the form, they are attempting to break the law, not to mention their parole/probation (should there be some type of court ordered post incarceration supervision). So while a charge for not registering the gun may not be possible, they shouldn't own the gun. Therefore, they can be charged with violating the law, just not for failing to register the gun. Seems to be nothing more than a matter of semantics.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875