- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Supreme Court rules against 'Straw Purchasers' of Guns
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:14 pm to Sentrius
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:14 pm to Sentrius
Serious question.... How can Righties claim that laws against straw purchases are violations of the 2nd Amendment on one hand, then blame the Obama administration for the deaths of those killed by guns purchased in fast and furious, an ATF operation which allowed illegal straw purchases?
In F&F you had the DOJ tell the ATF to allow the straw purchase of guns. Those straw purchases were illegal. Those purchases resulted in those guns being brought into Mexico killing people. Righties are furious, forgetting their mantra that gun laws don't work and criminals will get guns and that guns don't kill people, people kill people, and want Holders head for this. Yet they want to do away with the very laws they attack Holder for not enforcing.
Do you not see the inconsistency there? I mean if you got your way, there would be nothing stopping many many many more straw purchases with results far worse than F&F.
What am I missing here?
In F&F you had the DOJ tell the ATF to allow the straw purchase of guns. Those straw purchases were illegal. Those purchases resulted in those guns being brought into Mexico killing people. Righties are furious, forgetting their mantra that gun laws don't work and criminals will get guns and that guns don't kill people, people kill people, and want Holders head for this. Yet they want to do away with the very laws they attack Holder for not enforcing.
Do you not see the inconsistency there? I mean if you got your way, there would be nothing stopping many many many more straw purchases with results far worse than F&F.
What am I missing here?
7
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:16 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:Wow! That's just wrong!
an ATF operation which allowed illegal straw purchases?
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:45 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:
What am I missing here?
You don't correctly understand what a 'straw purchase' is in this context.
Posted on 6/16/14 at 7:46 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:What you are missing is the fact that the guns were walked into Mexico without any plans to track the weapons once they were across the border. The other problem was that the straw purchaser was allowed by ATF to purchase the guns even though he was on the suspect list.
What am I missing here?
Posted on 6/16/14 at 8:02 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:
How can Righties claim that laws against straw purchases are violations of the 2nd Amendment on one hand
Do you have a link to where 'righties' are trying to make straw purchases legal?
Remember, a straw purchase is the purchase of a gun by a qualified individual to knowingly give / sell to someone who isn't qualified to purchase / own a gun.
Take as much time as you need.
Posted on 6/16/14 at 10:06 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:
In F&F you had the DOJ tell the ATF to allow the straw purchase of guns. Those straw purchases were illegal. Those purchases resulted in those guns being brought into Mexico killing people. Righties are furious, forgetting their mantra that gun laws don't work and criminals will get guns and that guns don't kill people, people kill people, and want Holders head for this. Yet they want to do away with the very laws they attack Holder for not enforcing.
Difference 1 - in this case, no person precluded from purchasing the weapon (i.e. the intent of the law) got a weapon as a result of this straw purchase.
Difference 2 - In F&F the law was supposed to stop the exact transactions that were occurring - i.e. the dealers said, "Hey, ATF guys, we think these are illegal straw purchases. What should we do?"
There was no suspicion in the instant case, neither was there an actual transfer to the precluded person.
quote:
then blame the Obama administration for the deaths of those killed by guns purchased in fast and furious, an ATF operation which allowed illegal straw purchases?
Difference 3 - Obama and Holder ARE responsible for those deaths - which were preventable if the gun laws on the books had actually been enforced. No deaths occurred in the instant case.
Posted on 6/16/14 at 11:42 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:Are you sure this is a serious question?
Serious question.... How can Righties claim that laws against straw purchases are violations of the 2nd Amendment on one hand, then blame the Obama administration for the deaths of those killed by guns purchased in fast and furious, an ATF operation which allowed illegal straw purchases?
You can't tell the difference between a government agency charged with enforcing the law, violating the law, for the distinct purpose of putting guns into the hands of criminals... and a private citizen making a purchase then giving a gift to another law abiding citizen?
You can't tell the difference? Really?
There are thousands of ways the transaction could have been conducted legally, with no difference in result. For example had he taken the money only an hour later. No such remediation for F&F exists.
This post was edited on 6/16/14 at 11:55 pm
Posted on 6/17/14 at 8:02 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
Vegas Bengal
You can't be serious lol. I can't figure out if the things you type on here are the result of ignorance or dishonesty...
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News