Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Slippery Slope Time


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Slippery Slope Time Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 4:28:51 PM   
TricklessMagic


Posts: 248
Joined: 9/14/2009
Status: offline
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.

Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 4:57:56 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
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.

(in reply to TricklessMagic)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:00:54 PM   
TricklessMagic


Posts: 248
Joined: 9/14/2009
Status: offline
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.


(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:08:17 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to TricklessMagic)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:08:18 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
Yup......

No one is taking your guns.................or suggesting it.

If someone is, weren`t legally supposed to have them in the 1st place.

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to TricklessMagic)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:09:10 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
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

(in reply to TricklessMagic)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:11:21 PM   
TricklessMagic


Posts: 248
Joined: 9/14/2009
Status: offline
So the usual suspects have arrived and they haven't disappointed ha ha ha

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:14:39 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
Blame yourself for tripping my bullshit detector.

(in reply to TricklessMagic)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:17:26 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:19:52 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

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?

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to TricklessMagic)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:22:29 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

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.....

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:24:21 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

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/

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:24:22 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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.

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:39:43 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
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.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 5:47:54 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline
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.



_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 7:56:25 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

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?

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 10:16:46 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

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?

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 10:21:50 PM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/10/2013 10:54:22 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
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.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Slippery Slope Time - 5/11/2013 2:24:21 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
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.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Slippery Slope Time Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094