The federal prison reports from the DHS and DOJ have been posted by myself and others multiple times. These reports clearly demonstrate the over-population of illegal immigrants in federal prisons, provides all the data in detail, and states very clearly these criminals are not in prison for illegal entry.
More liberal hate crimes: Man pulls gun on a husband and wife in a store for wearing MAGA hats
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
The federal prison reports from the DHS and DOJ have been posted by myself and others multiple times. These reports clearly demonstrate the over-population of illegal immigrants in federal prisons, provides all the data in detail, and states very clearly these criminals are not in prison for illegal entry.
Do you mean the "Alien incarceration report" that magically started becoming a thing after 2017?
Yeah, I'm sure politics aren't involved.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Alien_Incarceration_Report_OIS_FY17_Q4_2.pdf
for an actual report:
https://www.cato.org/publications/i...f/their-numbers-demographics-countries-origin
The point (which you continue to miss and feign boredom in an attempt to backtrack) is that we do not know whether he served time, how long he served if he did serve, or anything about the charge. All it states is "unlawful possession". I've asked you if you had more info, but as usual, you never answer that question. That would show that you don't. All you have is your belief. Belief is fine but that's all it is.
I don't have a problem admitting that some laws regarding gun control are too lax. I'm on record on this forum multiple times saying so. You, however, love to leap to conclusions and instantly go after gun laws without any additional information because you have a narrative to push, an ax to grind. You don't care about the issue, just moving the football down the field for your team. You're not interested in saving lives, just banning guns. You're not interested in finding middle ground, just winning.
I have stated I would change my view if more information was presented. You never change your view on anything. You're always right (according to you).
You're the typical liberal, all emotion, short on facts and when things don't turn out how you want you plug your ears and run away (or put folks on ignore). Keep yourself safe in that little circle you draw around your life - just know that the world goes by on its own while you do, not giving a shit about your pitiful excuse for a life.
So you prefer to believed CATO that has a strong pro-immigration stance including illegals rather than data from an official government report. One should note the DOJ report on incarnation figures has been released every quarter for decades.
Wrong. You jumped to the conclusion that the laws were not enforced. I did what is called critical thinking and analyzed the facts as presented and came to the right conclusion this man legally possessed the firearm.
No on your stupid assertion telling me that I am interested in banning all guns. However, what is the middle ground between “well regulated” and reckless gun laws?
Making things even worse is people like you who don’t understand yes people can have convictions on unlawful possession and other violations and still be allowed to legally own and carry a weapon.
You also claim I am a know it all, I assure there are only a few posts of the dozen or so that get posted I respond to because those are areas I am educated in and interested in, gun laws and gun violence happens to be one of them.
I am not shocked at all by this story because it’s not uncommon for reckless people to be able to legally own guns. I know this because I asked myself why does the law allow this a long time ago and learned there are many reckless and weak gun laws in this country.
Perhaps you should try actually looking into how easy it is for people that common sense says should not possess a gun can do so. You might even be surprised and learn something.
No, what I said was someone convicted of an unlawful firearm possession should not be able to own a firearm. Because you nitpick every little letter and word to ensure you get the upper hand in the argument, I probably should have said "assuming he was convicted and sent to jail for it, but some states have different laws. Void in CT, NY and wherever prohibited by law. All references to persons imaginary or real is entirely unintentional and coincidental, etc". That's what it is like when discussing anything with you. I also said I would happily change my opinion if there were more facts brought to the table. Facts you never brought to the table.
There's the problem right there. "Reckless" is an opinion. I don't consider them "reckless". Is there room to make them better? Yep. But you can't start with an assumption that is your opinion. That's not where you begin the dialogue.
I understand just fine. But facts in the case were presented ambiguously. I know, as a liberal, this is a confusing argument for you as you guys like to assume right from the start based on incomplete info (which gets you in trouble regularly) but I much prefer to not jump to conclusions when I can. Sometimes my inner liberal gets me in trouble, but most of the time I try to wait and see, willing to change my opinion as more facts are presented.
Right, wherever you have a narrative to push.
Again, I am on record here stating various gun laws should be toughened. For example, I've advocated for raising the minimum age to own a firearm to 25. I don't have any problem identifying issues in current law and I agree with you that it is not uncommon for reckless people to be able to legally own guns because of loopholes and other issues in law. I am willing to concede various points. I am willing to be open to discussion. If you were as well, our discussions would go much differently.
I doubt it. Anti-gun rights zealots will just pocket your concession and move on to the next anti-gun issue on their endless list. Concessions do nothing but raise the floor for more concessions.
Why should the age to own a firearm be raised? People are considered mature enough to vote, get married and join the military at 18. I get it, you don't want 18 year old gang bangers being able to have guns, but what about the responsible 18 year old farm kid? Most of my friends and I had firearms before we were old enough to drive.
I am forced to agree. Folks like Futurecurrents and UsualName demonstrate over and over their desire to push all the way to gun bans without ever having honest debate. They nitpick, try to get you on technicalities, and push emotional arguments while at the same time ignoring requests for data to support their points.
Because the 18 year old responsible farm kid is the exception. Most 18 year olds these days are not at all mature, and don't treat weapons with respect. I see it every time I am at the range.
From the expert on parroting.