Banning guns keeps people safe huh?

[dieselram94]

I'm sure many will disagree but frankly for a democrat I think Obama has done a pretty good job using drones and spec ops guys to bring the fight to the enemy. I'm 100 percent for this. I believe this is the right strategy as opposed to massive troop usage. Limits US casualties and allows us to strike where troops could not be used. Frankly we need to fight terror / guerrilla tactics with the same not with conventional tactics.

As long as the drones are not used in this country against legal citizens I agree. I would rather keep our troops safe as well as being much cheaper. I think as a country we need to start calling these acts terror and get about the business of dealing with it. TSA feels up some old lady in a wheel chair but lets a guy go with out a second look who is clearly Muslim because they don't want to be accused of profiling. I know I will catch a bunch of flack for that statement! But it does not make sense, we need to effectively identify the enemy and take them out as well as defund their activities. And here we are giving massive amounts of money to the UN when they allow terrorist countries to have a seat What is wrong with us?

Just in case anyone is wondering, I am not racist and not every muslim is a threat.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[0121stockpicker]

As long as the drones are not used in this country against legal citizens I agree. I would rather keep our troops safe as well as being much cheaper. I think as a country we need to start calling these acts terror and get about the business of dealing with it. TSA feels up some old lady in a wheel chair but lets a guy go with out a second look who is clearly Muslim because they don't want to be accused of profiling. I know I will catch a bunch of flack for that statement! But it does not make sense, we need to effectively identify the enemy and take them out as well as defund their activities. And here we are giving massive amounts of money to the UN when they allow terrorist countries to have a seat What is wrong with us?

Just in case anyone is wondering, I am not racist and not every muslim is a threat.

What would be the difference if a drone was used to track a fleeing criminal as opposed to a police helicopter with FLIR?? Why the big fear of the "drone"? Why do you think it's any diff than using a plane, jet or helicopter for the same purpose?? I have no problem with police using robots either? Why risk human lives if you don't have to??

 

[dieselram94]

Tracking is ok with me if following a criminal and not some illegal tracking without a warrant. Problem is I just don't trust the govt's intentions especially as they have proven these fears founded as of late.

 

[ivan salis]

without guns , gun violence is down --duh the criminals just "switch" to a different form of weapon --the old, the physically weak and women are easy prey without a firearm , normally speaking they can easily be manhandled or killed by young strong criminal men --if gun violence includes "criminals shot in the act of committing violence / crime "-- the " books" are being cooked --the real question is are the overall numbers of murders down --compared to the "pre ban" days ---not the tool it was done with but the numbers of actual deaths of innocent people -- only that will tell you if you have been made "safer" or not --and the "answer" is?

 

[ivan salis]

ah "someone" wants to know the "leap of logic" from muslim terrorist attack in britian to obama lying -- ok follow this train of thought --- what occurred in England can occur here as well * however currently American citizens for the most part can own guns , guns that CAN be used to shoot and stop such nut case attackers like the ones in jolly ole England * the brits were very lucky that those nut jobs did not kill many more --as seen on the video a woman walked right past them --they coulkd have easily killeds her and most likely many others if they choose to before a "amed cop" finally showed up --and note it took an"armed cop" to stop them -- Obama wants to strip many folks from gun ownership making us "sheep" for the wolves of the world -- and I for one --will defend myself and loved ones with deadly force if push comes to shove and I want the tools to do it with.

 

[0121stockpicker]

ah "someone" wants to know the "leap of logic" from muslim terrorist attack in britian to obama lying -- ok follow this train of thought --- what occurred in England can occur here as well * however currently American citizens for the most part can own guns , guns that CAN be used to shoot and stop such nut case attackers like the ones in jolly ole England

 

[0121stockpicker]

ah "someone" wants to know the "leap of logic" from muslim terrorist attack in britian to obama lying -- ok follow this train of thought --- what occurred in England can occur here as well * however currently American citizens for the most part can own guns , guns that CAN be used to shoot and stop such nut case attackers like the ones in jolly ole England * the brits were very lucky that those nut jobs did not kill many more --as seen on the video a woman walked right past them --they coulkd have easily killeds her and most likely many others if they choose to before a "amed cop" finally showed up --and note it took an"armed cop" to stop them -- Obama wants to strip many folks from gun ownership making us "sheep" for the wolves of the world -- and I for one --will defend myself and loved ones with deadly force if push comes to shove and I want the tools to do it with.

No need to ever justify an anti Obama comment on this site. They are all welcomed and highly encouraged.

 

[dieselram94]

Glad to see you have come around Stockpicker!

 

[Bum Luck]

Presidents:

Can only do so much; they're not dictators.

They work in a structured environment with surprisingly (for us) little freedom of action. Many other forces are at work, from Congress to the Big Money Boys that tell everyone what to do (like mainly fill their private trough).

It's true that every once in a while they can make a difference, but you have to know what you can achieve and what you can't. It's a more complicated game than what we talk about sitting on the drywall load having lunch. Sure, we can complain, but that does little good.

It's all about getting elected and owing who did it for you. Campaign finance reform is the minimum for starting to get our government back, and all the rest is just BS.

 

[0121stockpicker]

Presidents:

Can only do so much; they're not dictators.

They work in a structured environment with surprisingly (for us) little freedom of action. Many other forces are at work, from Congress to the Big Money Boys that tell everyone what to do (like mainly fill their private trough).

It's true that every once in a while they can make a difference, but you have to know what you can achieve and what you can't. It's a more complicated game than what we talk about sitting on the drywall load having lunch. Sure, we can complain, but that does little good.

It's all about getting elected and owing who did it for you. Campaign finance reform is the minimum for starting to get our government back, and all the rest is just BS.

Well put. Completely agree.

 

[dieselram94]

Bum luck I would like to add term limits to campaign finance reform as being crucial to getting back on track. We don't need anymore Charlie Rengals...

 

[ivan salis]

I unlike many others try to explain to other posters why I feel and think the way I do in a logical statement. -- you may or may not agree with me , this is America and that is your right.

 

[0121stockpicker]

Bum luck I would like to add term limits to campaign finance reform as being crucial to getting back on track. We don't need anymore Charlie Rengals...

A buddy of mine once suggested that congress people get basically chosen by random like jury duty. It would obviously never happen but when I thought about it a little the concept actually has a lot of merit. Would be kind of neat.

 

[mustangpalmer1911]

A buddy of mine once suggested that congress people get basically chosen by random like jury duty. It would obviously never happen but when I thought about it a little the concept actually has a lot of merit. Would be kind of neat.

Can't be any worse than we got now right . Probably would work pretty good since people would be doing what is right for this country not for money

 

[dieselram94]

Can't be any worse than we got now right . Probably would work pretty good since people would be doing what is right for this country not for money

Yup, we would have less criminals. There is a reason these people run for office...

Sent from my SCH-R930 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Crispin]

A buddy of mine once suggested that congress people get basically chosen by random like jury duty. It would obviously never happen but when I thought about it a little the concept actually has a lot of merit. Would be kind of neat.

Ummm...spend a week following me around work and you will realize how scary this would be.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Can't be any worse than we got now right . Probably would work pretty good since people would be doing what is right for this country not for money

That same pool would contain the parasites, freeloaders and blind followers of the current occupant in the White House.... No thank you, we need to start holding those elected accountable to the oath they take on office....

 

[Bum Luck]

Ummm...spend a week following me around work and you will realize how scary this would be.

Yeah, I get that.

Teacher friends tell me that they're seeing kids that aren't even toilet trained. What does that tell you about the parents? Would the word "citizens" apply also to them? "Senator"?

Yeesh!

Term limits are meaningless. It's the bribery of public officials that's the problem, and changing the revolving door won't solve the problem.

 

[GMD52]

Even by the end of their term limits, they would be financaly secure! Money elects them, and money un-elects them. Term limits would only replace one leach with another!

 

[worldtalker]

Even by the end of their term limits, they would be financaly secure! Money elects them, and money un-elects them. Term limits would only replace one leach with another!

Principales and morals are all that concern me,go Brother Paul!!!!