In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 2594
Online now 2279 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Those issues have always been important to democratic politicians. That hasn't changed. That's all I'm saying. It really isn't an outlandish assertion.
It's clear that we don't want to hear any more of this gun control nonsense. They can't even pas this crap in the Senate.
Move on people.
Important does not equal taking a stance. It's more like straddling the fence to wait for support to know which way to jump. If they really supported gay marriage then they would have came out and said it in the 2008 election, but they said the opposite and waited to see which way support was leaning because Prop 8 just failed. Now it has gained steam and is worth pushing in their opinion.
Your point isn't outlandish but to deny that liberalism hasn't taken a huge step forward in the last few years to push their agenda is either an outright lie or a denial. Obama getting reelected has done the same for him as it has his followers. Both can now push extreme liberal views and see what can get supported. So far, most of it has been shot down as ridiculous. Don't be surprised if the Republicans dominate the midterm elections.
Public opinion has certainly changed which allows the actual discussion of such issues. But there really isn't anything at all controversial or extreme about gay marriage (majority support), or background checks (majority support) or immigration reform (majority support) There's really only a small portion of the country that feels that these views are extreme. Eventually there will be a federal law recognizing gay marriage. Immigration reform is coming whether you want it to or not and it will be republicans leading the charge. And eventually a bill regarding gun legislation will pass as well. These are all things that will happen eventually. It's foolish to think that America will look and act the same 10 or even 5 years from now.
Do non sex offenders have to register as a sex offender?
So why is it non-criminals should be subjected to 'background checks' making private party sales a total pain in the ass by requiring a 3rd party and registration fees?
Lastly, how exactly do you propose this 'background check' system is going to hinder the ability of a criminal to acquire a firearm? Criminals always follow the rules, amiright?
Since you claim to be tBB lawyer, I am curious if you have had a chance to think about the questions that I asked yesterday.
They were about the new laws in NY & Conn. The new laws require people who own guns that used to be legal, but are now illegal, to register them with the state registry.
If Adam Lanza were to be caught alive, how would the new laws affect him in court? Sure he would go to trial for murder under old laws, but how would the new laws affect him? Would he not be exempt from having to register those guns and extended magazines since he did not legally own the guns? Wouldn't the new laws only apply to law abiding citizens and not criminals with intent to commit crimes?
I guess my main point is, what do those new state laws accomplish and could it have stopped the Newton Massacre? If you feel like they are pointless and don't change a gd thing then feel free to say it.
In my best Lee Corso voice...Not so fast
Background checks and immigration do not have the majority support. When you use a poll that asks illegal immigrants and their families then of course they have the support. The polls that get posted online that ask 1000 of 300+ million people aren't legit polls.
They are ramming gay marriage down everyone's throats but California couldn't even pass it by vote during Prop 8. That wasn't that long ago. I agree that it will eventually pass but don't be so sure that gun control will. Immigration reform will be the first thing to change because both parties know that it can decide an election. Plus, Republicans can't afford to lose Texas.
Bill did nothing...
I have purchased guns at gun shows in 4 different states (AL, TN, FL and LA). I had a background check in all cases, there is no gunshow or internet purchase loophole. If you buy a gun from a dealer, they will run a BG check period. If you buy from an individual, that law varies by state as to whether or not a BG check is required (not required in any state I have lived in). The bill discussed wouldn't have changed a thing and would have done NOTHING to stop any crime (including crimes like VT, sandy hook, aurora, AZ...). Every one of those guns were purchased legally and BG checks were passed (Lanza's mom purchased them and he killed her to take them).
Mental health is this issue. Why not have a national database with all Felons and those with potentially violent mental disorders. Call the 800 number, enter DL number, have the buyer verify some piece of info and get an answer in seconds. Clean, you can buy and no paperwork. Denied, and a potential warrant for your arrest (Felon, yes, if mental issue, must have been notified and you can appeal. state must pick up tab for appeal if you win). I would just be very cautious about what and who defines someone as MI and put on list.
This post was edited by menichols74 12 months ago
Rather than blistering back here something just dawned on me.
Forget how Troy worded that sentence. For the sake of my own clarity, would you agree or disagree that many liberal democratic politicians are more comfortable today standing firmly and publicly behind their beliefs in equality for gays than they would have been 10-15 years ago?
It wasn't just how Troy worded the sentence, you jumped in and endorsed it and then spent an entire page telling me you didn't, while focusing on the one example you proposed that actually had some merit. But in doing so, you missed the actual premise of the argument which had nothing to do with "national politics" but rather was a rebuttal to Troy's assertion that all of a sudden democratic politicians were more liberal.
But to answer your question, (which of course is an aside to what was the actual discussion) obviously yes, public opinion has made it easier for politicians to come forward in support of gay marriage.
Oh please cry a fvcking river. Race always has be brought up.
Troy: I would argue that the liberal platform has been pretty consistent since the 60s at least
Troy: And that the reason liberal politicians haven't been so bold about their beliefs in the past was that this was still a pretty conservative country and they feared it would scare off too many voters.
Troy: You use liberal states as your examples when we are clearly talking national politics here. Damn man, lol.
So was Troy asserting that "all of a sudden dems are more liberal"? No, he wasn't. He stated plainly the exact opposite (that they've never changed... that the slow-play is part and parcel with their craven tactics ). Was he referencing national politics? Yes, he was.
So did I miss the premise, or did you just happen to parse out one of Troy's sentences to construct an argument that no one was really making?
If the "Majority" wanted it, then why didn't it pass?
No, you missed the point. But I appreciate your participation.
Thanks man. And I appreciate how stupid you are. It's makes embarrassing you effortless.
Hey man, don't sweat it. It's no problem at all.
I think you just won the thread.
" those who surrender freedom for security, will not have, nor do they deserve either one". Ben Franklin
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports