^ that's kinda the point. Politicians aren't defending civil liberties here, they're trying to please their lobbyists.

I think Obama is pushing this now as a ploy to force the GOP to either support a position that "allows terrorists to buy guns" or to "get rid of the no fly list", either of which can be positioned as being soft-on-terrorism.

The end result being a bill that helps generate some momentum for gun control legislation, or creating an avenue for democratic politicians to attack republicans for being weak on terrorism.

This has nothing to do really with civil liberties.

12/7/2015 6:34:48 PM

I will totally agree with that

12/7/2015 6:47:43 PM

Quote :

"Investigators have found evidence of “pre-planning,” Bowdich said. Both attackers went to shooting ranges in the Los Angeles region for target practice, including one such visit just days before the shooting, he said. ... A team of three officials spent about 30 minutes inside the home of Enrique Marquez, a former neighbor of Farook’s, and left carrying a large cardboard box. The box’s contents were unknown, and the officials declined to identify themselves or their agency to reporters outside. The search at the modest suburban home, the second in two days, took place as new details surfaced about Marquez, who officials say bought the DPMS and Smith & Wesson AR-15 rifles that Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, used in the Dec. 2 rampage. ... On Sunday, Italian publication La Stampa published an interview with Farook’s father, also named Syed, in which he said his son had harbored anti-Semitic animosity. Reached at his son Raheel’s home on Sunday morning, the elder Farook said his views differed from those of his son. “He was going towards [conservatism],” he told reporters through the gate of the home. “His views were conservative, my views were liberal.”"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/12/07/san-bernardino-officials-say-they-are-trying-to-resume-normal-business-after-shooting/

I like that going to a gun range= preplanning for a mass shooting

Quote :

"The rifles they used had been altered to make them more lethal"

I'm assuming this is a full-auto conversion, which from what i've learned from TWW, is not hard to do. There are gun kits sold specifically to allow for full-auto capabilities.

[Edited on December 7, 2015 at 7:21 PM. Reason : ]

12/7/2015 7:17:12 PM

Incorrect. They were not full auto, they were modified in a way that is not compliant with California laws. They have to have a bullet button which permanently fixes a magazine to the rifle among other things like a pistol grip. I don't know all of the whacky California laws but they can only have so many of the banned features (pistol grip, detachable magazines, etc).

12/7/2015 7:36:37 PM

wait wait wait

why is 95% of the argument here about what laws we should enact, what rules make sense, take away the guns, ban people from flying, background checks....blah blah.

Pretty sure I didn't read a single thing about people watching out for themselves, respecting lives and property, and just obeying the laws that are already on the books.

Killing people is against the law. What more needs to be done?

I am a gun owner, I drive a car, and I do those things in a responsible manner. I respect others and their lives. Just do that. It is not hard.

However, if you are a drain on society and hurt/kill others, or know about it and do nothing, then you are finished. Especially if you are an immigrant. We let you into this country to make it better. Even if you send your money back to Mexico every week, that doesn't help make this country stronger.

We have TONS of problems here, but guns aren't it.

12/7/2015 7:42:06 PM

Quote :

"I like that going to a gun range= preplanning for a mass shooting "

If the Aurora theater shooter had gone to a gun range ahead of time and realized that the 100 round drum magazine in his AR was prone to jamming, he probably would have changed his magazine choice and killed a lot more people that night.

[Edited on December 7, 2015 at 10:18 PM. Reason : full auto is overrated. you don't need suppressive fire or faster shooting against an unarmed target]

12/7/2015 10:13:25 PM

this is the modification they made to the rifles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeVrHFsLVw0

they swapped the california "bullet button" magazine release out for a standard ar-15 magazine release. it does not make the firearm full auto. it just makes it where you don't need a punch, tip of a bullet, etc. to release the magazine. you can just use your finger like usual.

california does not mandate the "bullet button". the bullet button is a legal workaround for the california "assault weapons" ban. by definition, the gun is not an "assault weapon" if it does not have a detachable magazine. the mag is not considered detachable if it requires a tool to remove it. folks came up with the "bullet button" in response to the legislation.

[Edited on December 7, 2015 at 10:31 PM. Reason : afds]

12/7/2015 10:28:26 PM

I thought CA also banned the AR-15 by name

12/7/2015 10:34:44 PM

Quote :

"e have TONS of problems here, but guns"

Can't take out guns rawr rawr rawr

The people that rabidly defend against any sort of reasonable addition to gun control make laugh! Of all the rights trampled upon by the government especially during the Bush days (aka water boarding, unconstrained monitoring by the NSA, and shoving the due process label down the toilet by giving someone a Turrist label). As soon as you mention guns they get out of shape. I get it you need your fully auto AK47 so you can make your stand against the evil government (HINT: it's only evil if the president has a -D next to his name) one day.

Alas though the NSA has already tracked your seditious plans and will send the black van to your house one night or bomb it from 30,000 ft during the great Rush Limbaugh led civil war. LAWLZ

12/7/2015 10:37:27 PM

^^yes, but there are ways around that as well. there are hundreds of models of AR-15 style rifles that aren't actual Armalite or Colt model AR-15. they have a long list of models that are banned, but folks just come up with new ones.

[Edited on December 7, 2015 at 10:42 PM. Reason : i could make a NRR-15 or something]

12/7/2015 10:40:45 PM

^^^^
That's interesting, seems like it should be machined or welded on rather than being so easily modifiable.

[Edited on December 7, 2015 at 10:44 PM. Reason : ]

12/7/2015 10:43:58 PM

^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOLNvk1FVGo

we will always find a way around the laws

12/7/2015 10:48:25 PM

bullet button tool is directly on the fresh magazine (the guy in the video is an idiot, btw): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-ysrC1q-kY

12/7/2015 10:58:46 PM

Like these stupid stocks to get around the whole evil pistol grip thing

12/7/2015 11:02:37 PM

good article via TGD on facebook: https://popehat.com/2015/12/07/talking-productively-about-guns/

12/8/2015 12:06:16 AM

I'd invest in an NRR-15

12/8/2015 12:39:59 AM

^^^^^

If i'm senator Feinstein and i'm watching those videos, what I see are gun manufacturers purposefully making weapons with easily defeated safety mechanisms. If I put on my engineering hat, I can think of a bunch of ways to make a system that prevents a rapid swapping of a clip (which is the spirit of the law isn't it?). I don't think it's a stretch to say these gun manufacturers don't want these safety mechanisms to work-- they benefit from having them so simply bypassed.

Why should this be the case? It reminds me of the "grandfather clause" type of laws back in the days, where racists thought they were being clever, when it was pretty clear they were just racists (and the supreme court ruled thusly).

Maybe rather than thumbing their nose at the public, gun manufacturers should actually try to work with us and make guns that are great for sport shooting and self defense, but not so great for mass murder?

12/8/2015 1:05:58 AM

pro-tip: if anti-gun nuts want to be taken seriously, don't refer to magazines as "clips"

12/8/2015 1:53:26 AM

^ the distinction isn't relevant in this case.

12/8/2015 2:07:34 AM

^ yeah but you sound even more retarded when you mention these "clips", about "assault rifles" which you think AR stands for, and about these fictitious "full auto conversion kits" that don't exist. Just screams "I know absolutely nothing about guns". You DO want to sound a little competent about what you're discussing, right?

12/8/2015 5:34:27 AM

Quote :

"Automobiles are a major contributor to automobile related deaths. Why shouldn't we be implementing common sense automobile bans at the federal level? Isn't it irresponsible to just stand by and do nothing?"

Accidents vs crimes

And vehicles and vehicle safety are heavily regulated. Including required safety devices on vehicles and roadways. And these devices get more numerous, more advanced, and more effective with each generation. We have entire divisions of law enforcement focused on traffic enforcement/safety. Signage or signals are changed added where problem areas exist; guardrails/cabls installed, warning signs, caution lights, repaving, redesign, rerouting, realigning, etc. There are constant improvements to the transportation infrastructure to make it safer every single day. The transportation complex is always advancing to reduce accidents, injuries, and deaths. And for the most part, society has supported this, sans a small contingent of idiots.

And once again, you jump to a ban, when I flat out said I don't agree with firearm bans, so the analogous argument with vehicles is not only dumb, but moot.

[Edited on December 8, 2015 at 8:52 AM. Reason : /]

12/8/2015 8:50:21 AM

^ but you agree to restrictions. When those restrictions don't stop the next killing spree, we'll need more restrictions. Then when those don't work, we'll need a ban, because what Sporting purpose is a handgun, anyway? And after all, look how safe Australia is!

https://youtu.be/EHAnTa_cxEg

12/8/2015 9:25:41 AM

I agree with reasonable regulation, just like we already have some of. I also think the issue must be addressed from the human side as well.

And I don't know why you keep assuming I'm anti-firearm. I'm very much a supporter in the constitution. I own several firearms, including handguns. I would never be in favor of a ban. I'm in favor of at least attempting, to our best ability, to prevent those who should not own firearms from purchasing firearms.

[Edited on December 8, 2015 at 9:33 AM. Reason : .]

12/8/2015 9:32:29 AM

Quote :

"I dont know enough about the gun laws to know the answer I assume someone here does. I keep seeing this straw purchase being thrown around which I assume is in reference to that guy buying the guns legally but then giving them to someone else. Under the current law if you buy a weapon legally and then give or sell it to someone else what sort of paperwork or documentation is required? Is that a way people can avoid the whole background check thing?"

Never got a response would like to try again

12/8/2015 9:45:29 AM

the paperwork requirement for individual purchases varies by state. some states require a background check at the point of transfer, some states require a purchase permit (NC does this), but some states have pretty much no requirements. even in many of the states that require permit or background checks, there are few record keeping requirements and even fewer penalties for failing to maintaining records.

12/8/2015 9:56:21 AM

Straw purchasing is when someone legally purchases a firearm with the intent to provide it to someone who is legally not allowed to purchase/own a firearm.

^then that.

[Edited on December 8, 2015 at 9:58 AM. Reason : can stop typing, yay]

12/8/2015 9:57:56 AM

That may be one way to institute some gun control then that doesn't really affect anything. Don't allow gifting or selling of firearms by individuals but rather make it go through a dealer who is required to go through the necessary steps to sell a gun? Hold gun owners accountable for what happens with the guns they purchased? Again, I have never owned a firearm and don't know that I ever want to so I am not as familiar with all the laws, but seems to me no one should be able to transfer ownership of a firearm without the same paperwork and background checks as buying a new one.

12/8/2015 10:12:41 AM

that's what closing the background check loophole is about, proposals include either requiring those private sales to go through licensed dealers or at least requiring purchase permits (which involve a background check) for all sales.

i don't think just requiring permits is sufficient to significantly limit straw sales though, I think that there needs to be record keeping requirements so that a firearms provenance can at least be determined after the fact

[Edited on December 8, 2015 at 10:21 AM. Reason : if you want to make a gun not illogically mad, call it the gun show loophole. its fun. ]

12/8/2015 10:21:13 AM

Ah ok well that definitely seems like one step that is a no brainer. I think making all sales or transfers take place at a dealer where a paper trail can be established so it is always very clear who a gun owner is should not be an issue for anyone other than criminals.

If that is put in place then the law also should become you are responsible for your guns and what is done with them. Other than having them stolen I suppose, should some crime be committed with a gun you own, seems reasonable you should be held partly to blame. I can't see any reason all these "law abiding citizens" should have any issue with any of those things. Seems like a good start that doesn't take away anyone's right to own a gun yet puts in some good measures to at least track who owns a gun.

12/8/2015 10:36:07 AM

That may stop unintentional straw purchases, but it doesn't stop the intentional straw purchasers.

I have no problem with requiring background checks on all ownership transfers, provided a valid state permit can be used, that the NICS system is opened up to the public for use, and if not that but instead requiring a FFL to do the check, then all checks/transfers should be free. It costs FFLs literally nothing to do the check.

[Edited on December 8, 2015 at 11:16 AM. Reason : .]

12/8/2015 11:15:36 AM

Yeah there is no way you can stop someone from handing over their legally purchased weapon to someone who then goes on some killing spree so unfortunately there is nothing you can do other than make it law and known that you will go down with them in that event. Most people in this country are law abiding responsible gun owners and the ones who are not shouldn't own guns. I take responsible gun owner to be someone who knows where their guns are and what is being done with them. Keeping them locked up and in their possession at all times. I am not saying you cant bring your gun down to the range and let your buddy shoot it, but you also shouldn't be saying sure you can borrow it for a few weeks no problem. When your buddy then takes that gun and kills someone with it I think the owner should be held at least partly responsible in that situation.

12/8/2015 11:39:18 AM

Quote :

"That may stop unintentional straw purchases, but it doesn't stop the intentional straw purchasers"

having full paper trails to establish a firearms provenance would allow straw purchasers to be prosecuted after the fact

12/8/2015 11:42:45 AM

Exactly it may not stop a shooting from happening but it may dissuade people in the future if they know they will be held responsible.

12/8/2015 11:56:12 AM

the ATF is already one of the slowest working agencies when it comes to paperwork. I'd hate to see how bad they would screw up integrating NICS and eTrace to establish a paper trail.

12/8/2015 1:26:42 PM

Anybody saw this Liberty University President speech?

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=956175017805956&id=341163402640457





Is that one of those Christian universities?

[Edited on December 8, 2015 at 2:56 PM. Reason : ]

12/8/2015 2:54:53 PM

Christian university

12/8/2015 2:55:22 PM

"End those Muslims"? Really?

When will Americans and Christians apologize for his words en masse?

12/8/2015 2:58:06 PM

I really like nuts but realize that they can kill some people and therefor have given them up.

12/8/2015 4:23:05 PM

OK, I need a favor y'all.

I am arguing with a conspiracy theorist on Disqus who believes the moon landings were fake and all terrorist attacks of the recent past have been Mossad/CIA false flags.

So about this attack, he is saying the pictures of the bodies of the attackers show the man without a beard and the woman dressed in knee-high shorts under her outer garb/burka/abaya/overall.

All the pics I have seen of the man have his face heavily pixelated with him lying on the tarmac next to a pool of blood, so I can't tell if he has a beard or not. And I have not come across any pics of the wife after she was killed.

TWW, can you please post links to uncensored pictures of both of the killers after they had been killed? Or send me in a PM. I really want to see what this conspiracy theorist asshole is going on about. PLEASE!!!! Thanks

By the way, this is what he thinks happened:

Quote :

"This is what i think REALLY happened The guy was a CIA informant in the middle of an early Christmas party he gets a call from his handler telling him to play a role in an active shooting DRILL taking place nearby He is told to go home, get his wife, dress up, show up at the meeting again, scare the people off and then use the SUV as a getaway car - he is unhappy but has to oblige. he has no choice but to do as told. he cant call his family he cant tell his friends he cant even inform the Police -what is he going to tell them? in his mind he is just part of a exercise that happens in the area on a monthly basis he is told to fire blanks at the police once he stops the vehicle at a particular place Not knowing whether the whole thing was real or fake, he gets shot along with his wife FACTs He didnt own the SUV He did own guns (part of his training) The assault rifles were purchased by someone else? who? where did he guy all that money to buy these expensive weapons his family had no idea about anything He had no ties to any terror org. But it was too funny to see the great FBI not bothering to take shredded docts, passport, IDs., SS Card, Driver License This is how boston event played out That Simple!!"

And in an earlier post:

Quote :

"here is an alternate theory imagine you are in high school, you get approached by a guy claiming to be working for FBI, he asks you to be a undercover informant . They promise to protect your family. provide funds for college, a govt job etc. you have no choice but to go with it. you end up being their mole, reporting any suspicious activity in the Muslim community etc thinking you are a hero giving your allegiance to the country etc one day your handler ask you to be a part of a shooting drill you go along with the plan only to find out that someone has really shot the people (thus reports of more than two shooters) your handler calls to inform you that you are being suspected and it is best to get away from the crime scene and move to a safe house. all of a sudden you are now the fugitive the police and media receive anonymous tip they chase and hunt you down, they corner you on the highway one of the fbi agent shoots in the direction of police and the SWAT team they return fire thinking it came for you and your innocent wife you are now dead! the plant evidence at your home, put computers with visits to suspicious websites etc and now boys and girls you have a muslim terrrost on hand it had to happen after Paris it had to happen to stop the Syrian refugee immigration it had to happen to give weight to gun control laws it had to happen to restore trust on the police and law enforcement agencies sound familiars doesnt dejavu Boston...!!"

His latest posts, the ones I am trying to debunk:

Quote :

"funny! the car was hit with hundreds bullets in a "bloody shoot out" as they say Ak47 and ARs going off as if it was a war zone. YET there is not a single drop of blood on the street around the black car. it was just only around the body which was handcuffed - meaning he was alive when he walked 5mtrs away from the smoking vehicle - and then somebody shot him - but amazingly left no blood trail while walking off. when they pulled out the body of the woman and laid it next to the SUV, i failed to see a single blood drop when they removed the body. WHERE is the BLOOD?"

Quote :

"soon the world will know the newspapers are talking about it, the social media is getting aware, people all over the world are discussing it. it is so simple, why cant the US media report it. the Burka clad lady was in knee high shorts the dead guy on the street without a beard and this guy in the picture has no resemblance. you must a blind as a bat not to see that."

12/8/2015 7:25:59 PM

probably on 4chan

12/8/2015 7:33:33 PM

12/8/2015 7:38:40 PM

^ lol

^^ is 4chan going to put malware on my computer???

12/8/2015 7:55:15 PM

Quote :

"I am arguing with a conspiracy theorist on Disqus who believes the moon landings were fake and all terrorist attacks of the recent past have been Mossad/CIA false flags."

Lullz, why bother?

12/8/2015 9:28:14 PM

^ yeah you are right, but I still want to see the pictures to see for myself

12/8/2015 10:21:34 PM

latest developments

San Bernardino shooter may have planned a 2012 attack, officials say
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/us/san-bernardino-shooter-farook-2012-plot/index.html

Past plot and recent loan are latest clues
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/us/san-bernardino-shooting/index.html

San Bernardino Shooters Practiced for Attack a Year in Advance
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/san-bernardino-shooters-planned-attack-least-year-advance-n476521

12/9/2015 2:21:48 AM

Why has Saudi Arabia gotten a pass on this, shouldn't we be investigating how they were radicalized in Saudi Arabia? Everyone seems to talk about ISIS, and ISIS-inspired, but why are we not making a bigger deal about another example of Saudi extremism?

12/9/2015 9:15:36 AM

because its actually all muslims

/trump

12/9/2015 9:28:01 AM

^^ I've been saying the same thing. We all know how shady Saudi is but no one seems to care.

12/9/2015 9:36:41 AM

I think the average American is concerned about muslim extremism regardless of country. to the avg. American, it's all middle east desert muslim folks treading on us.

[Edited on December 9, 2015 at 10:40 AM. Reason : ]

12/9/2015 10:40:11 AM

Quote :

"Accidents vs crimes And vehicles and vehicle safety are heavily regulated. Including required safety devices on vehicles and roadways. And these devices get more numerous, more advanced, and more effective with each generation. We have entire divisions of law enforcement focused on traffic enforcement/safety. Signage or signals are changed added where problem areas exist; guardrails/cabls installed, warning signs, caution lights, repaving, redesign, rerouting, realigning, etc. There are constant improvements to the transportation infrastructure to make it safer every single day. The transportation complex is always advancing to reduce accidents, injuries, and deaths. And for the most part, society has supported this, sans a small contingent of idiots."

After all that and still a lot of people die in wrecks. I always wondered why car companies can make a car that goes 160 when that is doubled what is needed on the highway. If you could compare gun regulation to car regulation, a state that does not allow high capacity magazines should also think about not allowing a car to go over 80

12/9/2015 11:19:33 AM