The killer was profiled. But he was still allowed to purchase the weaponry regardless. Because that's how the Second Amendment presently works.
LGBT - Terror
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Wrong. We have the predictable outcome of a suicidal immigration policy.
I think we might be on the same page. I'm all for rigorous screening and examination. I've always been. I've known enough people personally that shouldn't own any guns to be against such prudence. I think we need it more now than ever.
Ok, here a perfect suggestion that appeases both sides:
* Muslim extremism will be more closely monitored, prevented, and screened. Government will infiltrate Muslim organizations in order to keep a tab on what is going on there. Immigration by Muslims will be limited or at the very least extremely well background checked.
at the same time
* We start an honest discussion about an unrelated but actually much more important issue, which is gun violence. We will honestly talk about the need of assault weapons and we get on with an honest debate about better screening and possibly a license that involves training for all gun owners and new gun purchasers.
Sound fair?
* Muslim extremism will be more closely monitored, prevented, and screened. Government will infiltrate Muslim organizations in order to keep a tab on what is going on there. Immigration by Muslims will be limited or at the very least extremely well background checked.
at the same time
* We start an honest discussion about an unrelated but actually much more important issue, which is gun violence. We will honestly talk about the need of assault weapons and we get on with an honest debate about better screening and possibly a license that involves training for all gun owners and new gun purchasers.
Sound fair?
It's troubling that somewhat who was an obvious problem couldn't be dealt with. But he was a citizen. His parents should be deported immediately but of course that won't happen either.
Just as you can't toss someone in jail on suspicion you can't deny them other constitutional rights. This guy apparently worked for a DHS contractor. How is that possible?
The lesson here is we can't deal with vast numbers of potential threats, so it is imperative that we limit the numbers. The way to do that is keep muslims out.
No. The former will not happen and the latter is another step down the slippery slope.
And what do we do with white supremacists?
http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/domestic-extremism-terrorism/c/selected-white-supremacist.html
It can be done, it has been done, and it will be done. So yeah, let's not go through this again.
Agreed. Obama, call it what it is: homophobia.
Do you honestly question the proportion of killings by gun violence where assault weapons were involved but no Muslims involved vs the number of deaths where the perpetrator was a Muslim? Can't be serious.
Prohibiting an AR15 in no way undermines the Second Amendment, as the 2nd A never specified specific weapons. That one can therefore argue that all weapons should be protected makes very little sense given that many assault weapons and several manufacturers of AR15 are already banned in many states. If such ban undermined the 2nd A then it would have already been successfully challenged all the way up to and beyond the Supreme court.
Prohibiting an AR15 in no way undermines the Second Amendment, as the 2nd A never specified specific weapons. That one can therefore argue that all weapons should be protected makes very little sense given that many assault weapons and several manufacturers of AR15 are already banned in many states. If such ban undermined the 2nd A then it would have already been successfully challenged all the way up to and beyond the Supreme court.