Posted on 02/12/2012 6:35:15 AM PST by marktwain
The concept that the government could or should only “allow” certain people to buy guns stands the very concept of American jurisprudence on its head. It presumes that the government knows all, controls all, and should be doing so. It is wrong and ineffective. It is the opposite of preventing criminals from possessing guns.
It is crazy to set up a huge expensive bureaucratic system, require everyone to jump though hoops and prove that they are *not* criminals in order to try, ineffectively, to prevent the few individuals who are not responsible, from having legal access to guns. This is a failed paradigm, and it should be abandoned. To accept the idea that the all gun sales should be monitored by the government, and only allowed to those it deems satisfactory is fundamentally wrong.
The entire idea of the enterprise has always been the death of a thousand cuts, where the restrictions on who can buy, and where, and how and what are continually increased until the number of gun owners is reduced to political insignificance.
NBC - Nothing But Crap
The left makes a foolish plan. They get caught doing it. They they continue like no one saw them doing it. Then Congress sits there with only one or two saying it is a crime.
Why not? Our elected Republican congressional “leaders” are all but ignoring it themselves...
Wow! Now that's a real surprise. The 0bama worshiping anti-gun media continues to spew out lies. Who would have guessed?
When did anyone ever get the idea that Republicans were pro gun? They're not. Even the much touted Reagan signed anti-gun legislation into law.
As part of the crony capitalism with General Electric...NBC was promised as an Obama prapaganda outlet. Jeff Immelt gets a pass on sweatshop labor in China...Obama gets his version of Fox.
I work with some Rats who constantly claimed that F&F or something like started under Bush. Anyone have any links/articles that a) show what enables them to make that claim,& b) What refutes that claim?
I want to be able to point to basic sources.
Wide receiver was very different. No guns ever crossed the border and there were tracing protocols. There was never a deliberate policy to lose guns.
Fast n furious was a deliberate policy to lose guns over the border.
Another difference is that under wide reciever we worked w Mexico. In fast n furious we never told Mexico
Many many many differences, don’t let the demo commies fool you.
Thanks marktwain. Partisan Media Shills ping.
Do you have any sourcing?
I won’t be believed without sourcing I can point to!
Do you have any sourcing?
I won’t be believed without sourcing I can point to!
Do you have any sourcing?
I won’t be believed without sourcing I can point to!
Do you have any sourcing?
I won’t be believed without sourcing I can point to!
See no nothing ping.
It wasn't until after JFK was shot, supposedly with a mail order rifle, that mail order sales were banned. There was no decrease in the amount of murders, armed robberies or other crimes in which guns were used, but that didn't stop the government from enacting more and more gun laws in order to disarm the law abiding.
Thankfully, despite the effort of the anti-gun MSM and others, we are making inroads on getting many of those rights restored.
Even if Bush had done a gun walking program, which he didn't, it wouldn't make the one Bozo's crew was doing ok.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.