Who Advises Mittens ?

[Slick]

the 3 stooges ?

speaking in an interview over in London today with NBC anchor Brian Williams , Mittens said the gun laws on the books shouldn't be changed and said that Colorado gunman James Holmes obtained all his weapons ILLEGALLY......wrong again Mittens , but Im sure you'll etch and scketch it tomorrow.

they need to Palin this clown until November , keep him away from those "gotcha" questions from the biased Liberal media. :lmao:

 

[Slick]

oh ya....he also said he was "unfamiliar" with the details of the worst mass shooting in American History.

dude.....you're running for POTUS and you are "unfamiliar" with the worst mass shooting in the history of the country....WOW

 

[Thumb]

Ask him a question about offshore tax shelters...bet he's all over that one.

 

[byco42]

"This person shouldn't have had any kind of weapons and bombs and other devices and it was illegal for him to have many of those things already. But he had them," Romney told NBC News in an interview. "And so we can sometimes hope that just changing the law will make all bad things go away. It won't."

Where in the quote does it say specifically that Holmes obtained the guns he used illegally?

 

[Michchamp]

"This person shouldn't have had any kind of weapons and bombs and other devices and it was illegal for him to have many of those things already. But he had them," Romney told NBC News in an interview. "And so we can sometimes hope that just changing the law will make all bad things go away. It won't."

Where in the quote does it say specifically that Holmes obtained the guns he used illegally?

he doesn't specify; in typical "asshole planning on serving the interests of the privileged few" fashion, he's deliberately vague on the facts.

But his ultimate point is clear: the NRA has a lot of money, and the mass of voters does not. The NRA does not want any regulations or restrictions on the purchase of guns or ammunition, to best maximize the profits of the industry it serves, so neither does Romney. So the rest of you are going to have to suffer through more of these mass shootings; either that, or make sure you can afford your own private security detail, like Mitt has to protect him and his family.

 

[Slick]

"This person shouldn't have had any kind of weapons and bombs and other devices and it was illegal for him to have many of those things already. But he had them," Romney told NBC News in an interview. "And so we can sometimes hope that just changing the law will make all bad things go away. It won't."

Where in the quote does it say specifically that Holmes obtained the guns he used illegally?

it wasn't illegal for him to have any of the guns....he obtained everyone of them legally.

 

[byco42]

he doesn't specify; in typical "asshole planning on serving the interests of the privileged few" fashion, he's deliberately vague on the facts.

But his ultimate point is clear: the NRA has a lot of money, and the mass of voters does not. The NRA does not want any regulations or restrictions on the purchase of guns or ammunition, to best maximize the profits of the industry it serves, so neither does Romney. So the rest of you are going to have to suffer through more of these mass shootings; either that, or make sure you can afford your own private security detail, like Mitt has to protect him and his family.

I gotta watch where I step. No restrictions are going to keep weapons out of the hands of the very dedicated people who feel they must have them for missions like this one; no matter what country you live in. Or city: Like, for example, Chicago or D.C.

 

[byco42]

it wasn't illegal for him to have any of the guns....he obtained everyone of them legally.

You didn't answer my question. Because you can't.

 

[Slick]

You didn't answer my question. Because you can't.

answer your question....:lmao:

everything he had was legal , the guns , the ammo and the homemade devices rigged to blow.

what was illegal for him to be in possesion of ?

 

[Michchamp]

I gotta watch where I step. No restrictions are going to keep weapons out of the hands of the very dedicated people who feel they must have them for missions like this one; no matter what country you live in. Or city: Like, for example, Chicago or D.C.

taking your argument to its logical conclusion, we should have no laws, since anyone can decide to break them at any time. Your argument is bankrupt.

there is no difference here between speed limits and limits on gun ownership. obviously there are reasonable qualifications to both; the problem now is that the NRA has succeeded in completely muddying the waters so that no reasonable debate can be had, and ANY REGULATION WHATSOEVER is portrayed as the act of a crazed totalitarian state seeking to enslave its citizens. The hyperbole these freaks use would be amusing, if it wasn't so harmful to the rest of society.

if you don't know where I'm coming from here, you really need to expand your sources of news intake.

 

[byco42]

answer your question....:lmao:

everything he had was legal , the guns , the ammo and the homemade devices rigged to blow.

what was illegal for him to be in possesion of ?

The homemade grenades are not legal to make or possess:

842. Unlawful Acts
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person?
(1) to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing,
or dealing in explosive materials without a license issued under this chapter

(c) ?Explosive materials? means explosives, blasting agents, and detonators.

(d) Except for the purposes of subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j) of section 844 of this title, ?explosives? means any chemical compound mixture, or device, the primary or common purpose of which is to function by explosion; the term includes, but is not limited to, dynamite and other high explosives, black powder, pellet powder, initiating explosives, detonators, safety fuses, squibs, detonating cord, igniter cord, and igniters. The Attorney General shall publish and revise at least annually in the Federal Register a list of these and any additional explosives which he determines to be within the coverage of this chapter. For the purposes of subsections (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), and (i) of section 844 of this title, the term ?explosive? is defined in subsection (j) of such section 844.

http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5400-7.pdf

 

[Slick]

wrong again....lol

the bombs were made from homamade materials and gasoline...which is totally legal to purchase....he obtained everything legally.

 

[Michchamp]

answer your question....:lmao:

everything he had was legal , the guns , the ammo and the homemade devices rigged to blow.

what was illegal for him to be in possesion of ?

he's defending Romney's pathetic attempt to parse words here... it was illegal for him to have "many" of the things here... so of course... any further regulations would not be needed.

- well, it WAS NOT ILLEGAL for him to have the ammo or guns of course, and those are what killed 12 people and injured 50 more, some critically, and one still in a coma.

- The homemade devices... not clear on this one. An article stated he used only fireworks and gasoline, rigged with tripwire fuses, all combined to create a bomb. None of those things would be illegal; making the bomb itself was, but the components were not.

So, for Romney to use the word "many" here to describe what was already illegal, is vague at best, and most likely completely incorrect.

And even beyond that, it's an awful argument to make, legally, morally, and socially bankrupt, and just totally anti-social and crude, intended only to pander to one of the sleaziest lobbying organizations in the country, and the mouthbreathers that belong to it.

Byco... to try and defend this garbage... I don't even know...

 

[redandguilty]

Regulating weapons shouldn't be oversimplified (you need to draw a line somewhere between rocks and nuclear weapons), but it's screwy right now that 60% of gun purchases require the background check and 40% fall under exemptions.

 

[Michchamp]

Regulating weapons shouldn't be oversimplified (you need to draw a line somewhere between rocks and nuclear weapons), but it's screwy right now that 60% of gun purchases require the background check and 40% fall under exemptions.

I think most Americans that casually follow this debate (as with all their news...) would be shocked to learn how many loopholes there are to buying a gun, and wouldn't be able to reconcile the NRA's constant rhetoric about the "evil government about to seize our guns" with the decades long successful trend to prevent any new regulations on ownership or designed to close loopholes, and indeed, to successfully rollback the few restrictions, however reasonable they were, on ownership that had been passed in the 90s.

allowing high capacity magazines, exempting gun shows from background checks, exempting dealers from reporting guns stolen or missing from their inventories, failing to fund any sort of reasonable background checks on purchasers in many states, etc.

after the VaTech shooting, they made a big show of allowing a law to be passed that would've prevented that nutcase kid from legally buying firearms based on his mental history... but of course, then they focused their lobbying efforts to ensure no funds were appropriated to implement the actual background checks. so the net result is zilch.

 

[byco42]

taking your argument to its logical conclusion, we should have no laws, since anyone can decide to break them at any time. Your argument is bankrupt.

My discussion is limited to gun regulation. There's no grounds to claim that it can be extended to promote anarchy.

I made a simple statement that I will rephrase: "No regulation is going to keep a nut job like this from his anointed mission." Ban gun ownership completely and this will still happen. The two fringes will warp and meet in the middle, and guys like this will still succeed. Do you disagree?

there is no difference here between speed limits and limits on gun ownership.

This is a completely convoluted comparison that fails to align the responsible use of a vehicle with the ownership of a gun.

NRA has succeeded in completely muddying the waters so that no reasonable debate can be had, and ANY REGULATION WHATSOEVER is portrayed as the act of a crazed totalitarian state seeking to enslave its citizens. The hyperbole these freaks use would be amusing, if it wasn't so harmful to the rest of society.

if you don't know where I'm coming from here, you really need to expand your sources of news intake.

The NRA can stifle debate? Really? How, then, did so many states successfully pass restrictive laws on obtaining and owning guns? You can read them for yourself.

 

[byco42]

wrong again....lol

the bombs were made from homamade materials and gasoline...which is totally legal to purchase....he obtained everything legally.

You're either being obtuse or naive. There were HOME MADE GRENADES in his apartment. These are ILLEGAL TO MAKE AND POSSESS. That he can purchase the materials legally is not the issue.

The quote cited "bombs and other devices" that were "illegal to have."

 

[byco42]

he's defending Romney's pathetic attempt to parse words here... it was illegal for him to have "many" of the things here... so of course... any further regulations would not be needed.

Romney did not parse words; he made a statement that was quoted. I'm challenging SLICK's parsing of ROMNEY's words. And you as well. And I'll repeat his point (and mine) for the BIASLY CHALLENGED: No law or regulation is going to prevent a psychopath from doing evil deeds and acts. The laws on the books, like this Federal law had NO effect on this guy:

? 842. Unlawful Acts
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person?
(1) to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing,
or dealing in explosive materials without a license issued under this chapter

If you actually think otherwise, or that the rig in his apartment didn't break about a dozen laws, local, state and federal, then you need to reevaluate your choice of careers.

 

[Michchamp]

well... there you have it through such impeccable reasoning: no new regulations needed!

the next psycho that wants to own a 100 shot magazine for his AR-15, buy 6,000 rounds of ammunition so he can shoot up your local movie theatre, or farmer's market, or bowling alley, or high school... GO RIGHT FUCKING AHEAD... Mitt Romney, and Byco are A-OK with it.

everyone should own guns. period. and restricting a type of gun or component of gun = restricting all gun ownership, so no regulations should be allowed.

 

[Slick]

ROMNEY: Well this person shouldn’t have had any kind of weapons and bombs and other devices and it was illegal for him to have many of those things already. But he had them. And so we can sometimes hope that just changing the law will make all bad things go away. It won’t. Changing the heart of the American people may well be what’s essential, to improve the lots of the American people.


Romney also admitted he was unaware about pretty much most of the situation in Colorado. My 14 year old watched CNN for about an hour and was pretty much fully updated....lol
​