How does any of that change the fact that making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns is a bad idea?
I'm pretty sure we all know why you won't show us how that vote went by name and party.
Shooting Suspect Was on School Rifle Team That Got NRA Grant
- Thread starter The Barbarian
- Start date
How does any of that change the fact that making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns is a bad idea?
I'm pretty sure we all know why you won't show us how that vote went by name and party.
Seems to me that Trump is doing more than obummer ever even thought about doing. Real Presidents get things done. Sit back and learn from Donald J. Trump. Your Commander in Chief.
drbrumley
Well-known member
There you have it folks, Barbie here would rather make criminals out of mentally challenged people.
He also refuses to put the blame on the shooter, whether he was drugged up or not
He also doesn't acknowledge that the police came to where he lived over 30 times and the the FBI didn't do their job
As for who voted for the bill Trump signed, he would see democrats who voted for the bill. Maybe he is to lazy to do it.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Barbarian asks:
How does any of that change the fact that making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns is a bad idea?
I'm pretty sure we all know why you won't show us how that vote went by name and party.
How does making sure a mentally-ill person doesn't get weapons amount to "making them criminals?" If you were honest with yourself, you'd admit that Cruz would have been much better off if he had not been able to obtain weapons.
As would the 17 people he killed. It's just insane to argue that a person who says he wants to shoot up schools should be given guns.
If you were honest, you'd admit that I never said anything one way or the other about the shooter's culpability. And you don't know any more than I do about it. He may indeed have been able to know what he was doing was wrong. Or maybe not. That will get sorted out later. It has nothing to do with the disastrous results of letting him have firearms.
What do you think they should have done? Tossed him in a prison? Due process means nothing at all to you, does it?
You don't know, do you? You made the claim, now you're unwilling to support it, and are hoping I'll do it for you.
Maybe you're too lazy to do it. Or maybe you've already figured out what it will tell us. And explain to everyone why it would have been alright if a lot of democrats voted for it.
How does any of that change the fact that making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns is a bad idea?
I'm pretty sure we all know why you won't show us how that vote went by name and party.
How does making sure a mentally-ill person doesn't get weapons amount to "making them criminals?" If you were honest with yourself, you'd admit that Cruz would have been much better off if he had not been able to obtain weapons.
As would the 17 people he killed. It's just insane to argue that a person who says he wants to shoot up schools should be given guns.
If you were honest, you'd admit that I never said anything one way or the other about the shooter's culpability. And you don't know any more than I do about it. He may indeed have been able to know what he was doing was wrong. Or maybe not. That will get sorted out later. It has nothing to do with the disastrous results of letting him have firearms.
What do you think they should have done? Tossed him in a prison? Due process means nothing at all to you, does it?
You don't know, do you? You made the claim, now you're unwilling to support it, and are hoping I'll do it for you.
Maybe you're too lazy to do it. Or maybe you've already figured out what it will tell us. And explain to everyone why it would have been alright if a lot of democrats voted for it.
Right.
You chose instead to blame everyone except the one that is to blame ---- the shooter.
Just try not to get radicalized when it doesn’t happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Said Whitehouse staffers while chump was atMar a Lago doing off the cuff interviews.
But, the shooters are supposed to be mentally ill - according to President Chump. Therfore they cannot be blamed. So why sell them a bucket load of guns?
BTW tammy, thanks for the reputaions.
You're welcome.
jsanford108
New member
This demonstrates an immediate prejudice on your part. You did not view the video, saw it as a waste of time, and then preceded to falsely classify the host of said clip as a "Trump apologist" and a conspiracy theorist (both of which are completely false).
What are the consequences of my ideas, Barb?
It appears that you are denying fact, preferring to promote falsehoods.
As stated before, the NRA did not fund training; they funded safety wear. If I give money to the FBI for safety glasses, does that mean I trained the FBI?
Not only did Obama make it easier to kill Border Patrol agents, he then tried to cover up said fact.
Operation Fast and Furious was given the OK by Obama. This led to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Do you blame Obama for the death of this officer, yes or no?
False. In fact, Clinton and Obama immediately started a disinformation campaign, blaming a cartoon of Muhammad for the embassy attack.
But don't worry. When asked about Benghazi later, Clinton just said "who cares?" That seems to line up with the entire liberal opinion, including yours. How can you ever defend such a traitor, who let Americans die through intentional neglect?
Nope. Jurisdiction for embassies falls to the Secretary of State, who had been contacted about the escalating threat in this case.
Right, again, Trump is responsible for atrocious acts by terrorists that occurred before he was president. That makes logical sense.
After all, Obama did not want to tighten security and surveillance on possible terrorist threats, such as the Orlando shooter. This could much more easily be directly tied to Obama allowing the terrorist to shoot up the nightclub.
Keep that repetition going. Repeat the falsehood enough, and it may come true.
Can't take the facts and reality disagreeing with your view/agenda?
Let's take "Patrick jane" at his word and "Sit back and learn from Donald J. Trump."
While this President's solution for gun violence in the nation's schools is to shift the responsibility onto the teachers so that they will no longer be "gun free zones," many of his properties, hotels and resorts are deemed "gun free!"
In true "Trumpian" fashion "The Donald" denies this, but managers and employees at these venues repeatedly tell a different story!
Does anyone seriously think that "gun policy" for Trump properties doesn't come straight from the top?
If this President isn't prepared to lead by example, he's not prepared to lead!
As far as I know, your President doesn't have a solution for bun violence of any kind, whether they be hot dog buns or hot crossed etc. Do the kids throw them?
In other words "patrick jane" would rather divert attention away from the subject of Trump properties being deemed "gun free zones" because once again "The Donald's" actions contradict his words!
If you think the video had any arguments good enough bother bringing them up here, feel free to do so. It appears to not be the case. It appears that you are denying fact, preferring to promote falsehoods.
For training puposes?
It means you funded the training.
Show us that. I'm surprised that something that low-level would go all the way to the WH for approval. Can you show us that?
We have Trump's decision to make it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns, which led to those 17 deaths. But can you show that Obama signed off on Fast and Furious?
What do you have?
If you can show that Obama signed off on the program, as Trump signed off on letting crazy people get guns, then you and I can agree that in both cases they were responsible for one or seventeen deaths respectively.
What have you got?
Barbarian observes:
While Secretary of State Clinton told the republicans that cutting embassy security was a bad idea, I think Obama should have been more forceful in pressuring them to restore the cuts
Nope. It's true. One of the republicans responsible for cutting embassy security admitted it. He could hardly deny it; it's a matter of public record.
Chaffetz defends voting to cut funds for embassy security
http://thehill.com/video/house/2611...arning-about-libya-attack-is-totally-not-true
You got your stories mixed up. The cartoon was something else. The CIA captured one of the leaders of the attack on Benghazi, who told his friends that the attack was in revenge for an anti-Muslim video. Would you like me to show you?
That sounds like you just made it up. Show us. Checkable source.
The point is that Trump, by making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns, made events like the recent shooting possible.
Letting crazy people have guns isn't treason. It's stupidity and avarice.
They didn't necessarily want those kids to die; to Trump and the NRA, it's just business.
Barbarian observes:
No. Congress does not work for the president. The House republicans decided that our embassies did not need increased security, and the rest is history.
Yep. See above. The republicans, against Clinton's warnings, cut embassy security. The executive branch can only do what the Congress funds. And they inadequately funded security for our embassies.
Which is why Clinton warned the republicans that cutting funds for security was a mistake. They didn't listen.
The most recent one, of course. For reasons you already know. He wasn't responsible for cutting funds for Benghazi. That one was the fault of congressional republicans.
You've been badly misled about that. He didn't just increase surveillance; he went on the offensive, hunting down and killing a record number of terrorists, including Osama bin Laden.
You're agitated and resentful. But at some point, you have to find a way to accommodate yourself to reality.
jsanford108
New member
You are projecting.
You are really trying to maintain your argument, despite it clearly being dismantled.
Well, let me just provide a list.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/02/18-major-scandals-obama-presidency/
You got your stories mixed up. The cartoon was something else. The CIA captured one of the leaders of the attack on Benghazi, who told his friends that the attack was in revenge for an anti-Muslim video. Would you like me to show you?
I am not going to hold your hand and show you how to look for facts. I am sure it is found on CNN, buried under a lot of pro-Hillary articles. If not, it is because it is damaging to their own lies.
Are you just for strict gun control? Just say so if you are, rather than parading falsehoods around as means to try and prove your view as correct.
I love the clear ignoring of the Clinton support highlight, and trying to fool everyone, including yourself, that I was talking about Trump/NRA.
You really are wrapped up in your own fallacy-filled fantasy world.
Barbarian observes:
No. Congress does not work for the president. The House republicans decided that our embassies did not need increased security, and the rest is history.
Yep. See above. The republicans, against Clinton's warnings, cut embassy security. The executive branch can only do what the Congress funds. And they inadequately funded security for our embassies.[/QUOTE]It was not House Republicans that decided that the Libyan embassy did not need more security. It was Clinton who deliberately ignored information that the area was growing more hostile.
But once again, you show your mentality of "never let Leftists be responsible! Say it was Republicans instead."
Push and repeat that narrative. Maybe it will become reality.
So, Obama is responsible for killing bin Laden, but not for killing the people at the Orlando Nightclub? Yet, Trump is responsible for killing the kids in Florida?
From my above analysis of your perverse view, it seems you are the one denying reality. But, that is just reason, logic, objective facts, and reality itself disagreeing with you, Barbarian.
Maybe someday your repetition and pushing of illogical fantasy will make your falsehoods true.
Barbarian chuckles:
You got your stories mixed up. The cartoon was something else. The CIA captured one of the leaders of the attack on Benghazi, who told his friends that the attack was in revenge for an anti-Muslim video. Would you like me to show you?
Barbarian chuckles:
That sounds like you just made it up. Show us. Checkable source.
Translation: Sanford just made up the story, and knows he won't find any evidence to support it. We all knew that already. I just wanted you to confirm it.
Barbarian observes:
The point is that Trump, by making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns, made events like the recent shooting possible.
I never thought of keeping guns away from crazy people to be "strict gun control." Can you explain why you think it is?
Barbarian: Letting crazy people have guns isn't treason. It's stupidity and avarice.....They didn't necessarily want those kids to die; to Trump and the NRA, it's just business.
They are the people who made it easier for mentally-ill people to obtain guns. You didn't know that?
Barbarian observes:
No. Congress does not work for the president. The House republicans decided that our embassies did not need increased security, and the rest is history.
Yep. See above. The republicans, against Clinton's warnings, cut embassy security. The executive branch can only do what the Congress funds. And they inadequately funded security for our embassies.
It was their decision that all embassies needed less security. They cut funds for all of them. Chaffetz said that he did it because there were other priorities. One of them was to redecorate a National Guard Armory in Alabama.
Technically, he only gave the order to find him and capture or kill him. Our armed forces actually carried out his order.
Since he opposes homophobia, and wanted to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people, it would be hard to see how he was responsible for a mentally-disturbed gay-hater killing people.
Signing a bill making it easier for mentally-ill people to buy guns does make that sort of thing more likely, yes.
You seem to have a little trouble putting together a decent argument. If you took more time to think it would probably help.
You got your stories mixed up. The cartoon was something else. The CIA captured one of the leaders of the attack on Benghazi, who told his friends that the attack was in revenge for an anti-Muslim video. Would you like me to show you?
Barbarian chuckles:
That sounds like you just made it up. Show us. Checkable source.
Translation: Sanford just made up the story, and knows he won't find any evidence to support it. We all knew that already. I just wanted you to confirm it.
Barbarian observes:
The point is that Trump, by making it easier for mentally-ill people to get guns, made events like the recent shooting possible.
I never thought of keeping guns away from crazy people to be "strict gun control." Can you explain why you think it is?
Barbarian: Letting crazy people have guns isn't treason. It's stupidity and avarice.....They didn't necessarily want those kids to die; to Trump and the NRA, it's just business.
They are the people who made it easier for mentally-ill people to obtain guns. You didn't know that?
Barbarian observes:
No. Congress does not work for the president. The House republicans decided that our embassies did not need increased security, and the rest is history.
Yep. See above. The republicans, against Clinton's warnings, cut embassy security. The executive branch can only do what the Congress funds. And they inadequately funded security for our embassies.
It was their decision that all embassies needed less security. They cut funds for all of them. Chaffetz said that he did it because there were other priorities. One of them was to redecorate a National Guard Armory in Alabama.
Technically, he only gave the order to find him and capture or kill him. Our armed forces actually carried out his order.
Since he opposes homophobia, and wanted to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people, it would be hard to see how he was responsible for a mentally-disturbed gay-hater killing people.
Signing a bill making it easier for mentally-ill people to buy guns does make that sort of thing more likely, yes.
You seem to have a little trouble putting together a decent argument. If you took more time to think it would probably help.
Louisianatic
New member
There is no trying to talk sense and facts to an ignorant person such as barbarian. He's a waste of space and oxygen because all he stands on is the NRA and Trump signed off so the mentally ill could obtain guns fairly easy. I support Trump signing that bill cause the more I read on "the Barbie girl ian" the more I support Trump so continue making me love trumps decisions and accomplishments more. Just get over yourself and stop tryiing to influence the stripping of our god given rights and amendments.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I suppose that means you're not going to support your claims, um?
Like most Americans, I don't think giving crazy people guns is a good idea.
...you do. We get that.
Someone's hacked, um?
Trump/NRA 17, America 0.