[Drlee]

So your solution would be to take guns away from law abiding citizens so only the criminals have them.

That's fucking genius...

Can't speak for Hindsite but that is an absurd statement.

MY solution would be to require a license to carry a concealed weapon. This license would include demonstrating expertise with each weapon licensed as well as a comprehensive knowledge of the laws of engagement. I would require a thorough background check for the license.

Criminals (and I assume you mean convicted felons) are already prohibited from possessing a firearm. I would strengthen the penalty for that to include serious mandatory time in prison. That is already the case in most states.

One does not have to be a convicted felon to be a criminal. One could be a career criminal and never have been caught yet. So the licensing procedures might not catch these individuals but it would make them known to the police as a concealed carrier. In my state, this information is conveyed to the police whenever they encounter the carrier or his vehicle.

The SCOTUS has already ruled that the states can license or prohibit concealed carry. My personal preference would be for stringent licensing including the determination about whether the individual may need to carry concealed or not. There is a case which the SCOTUS may decide soon that will likely make open and concealed carry the right of every citizen regardless of their mental or moral condition. This is very sad in a country where we suffer so many needless gun deaths. But the idiots are running the asylum. There are a considerable number of so-called conservatives who believe that the right is more important than an overwhelmingly obvious necessity for public safety. So children will die and fools will be parading around with firearms. It is really very sad.

[Politics_Observer]

@Drlee @BigSteve

I posted actual evidence to support what Godstud said. Why are you ignoring it?

Please do not call people "dummy". It is ill bred though a notable feature of the right these days. It is used in lieu of an argument.

Yes, I have noticed Steve likes to ignore evidence and not make his case based on evidence and actual facts and logical conclusions that could could be reasonably drawn from the facts. And when he is presented with facts and evidence that contradict his position, instead or presenting facts from reliable and accepted sources to counter argue the other person, he just calls them idiot or stupid. All that shows is that Steve just can't make an intellectually reasoned argument based on facts from reliable academically and scientifically accepted sources and perhaps has a hard time with coping with the reality before him since he wishes to deny or ignore indisputable facts presented before him and that he has lack of critical thinking skills and an unwillingness to examine any beliefs he might hold that could be wrong. In his mind, it's his or way or the highway, reality and facts be damned. Unfortunately reality and facts have a way of ignoring the "my way or the highway" mentality. They just don't change just because you don't like them or do not wish to acknowledge them.

[BigSteve]

@Drlee [usermention=78153]All that shows is that Steve just can't make an intellectually reasoned argument based on facts from reliable academically and scientifically accepted sources and perhaps has a hard time with coping with the reality before him since he wishes to deny or ignore indisputable facts presented before him and that he has lack of critical thinking skills and an unwillingness to examine any beliefs he might hold that could be wrong.

You're funny.

A statement was made, so I asked what point he was trying to make because, on the surface, it was stupid...

In his mind, it's his or way or the highway, reality and facts be damned. Unfortunately reality and facts have a way of ignoring the "my way or the highway" mentality. They just don't change just because you don't like them or do not wish to acknowledge them.

Again, I'm not sure what point was being supported by the "facts" presented.

Oh, and I never called anyone a "dummy", so smarten the fuck up if you expect to be taken seriously...

[Drlee]

Oh, and I never called anyone a "dummy", so smarten the fuck up if you expect to be taken seriously...

Actually you did. The moderators removed it I suppose. If you are proud of your posts you should own them not run away.

[Hindsite]

I meant it's an opinion, not a descriptive statement, so you can't call it a lie. My bad for this misunderstanding, but please don't distort my message as well.

Why can't I call it a lie, if it is my opinion? As you stated, we are not speaking in facts, but only opinions.

[Godstud]

Calling posters liars is against the forum rules. It's that simple, @Hindsite. Take it up with a moderator in the basement if you like, but calling a person a liar, simply because you don't like what they are saying, is about as crude and rude as you can get.

Present some evidence to show they are "wrong", would be a better thing to do.

Have a nice day.

[Hindsite]

Calling posters liars is against the forum rules. It's that simple, @Hindsite. Take it up with a moderator in the basement if you like, but calling a person a liar, simply because you don't like what they are saying, is about as crude and rude as you can get.

I did not call a poster a liar. I called the statement or opinion a lie because it appeared to be stated as a fact and I believed it to be untrue and not a fact.

[Godstud]

It's akin to the same thing. They might be wrong, but no one here is "lying". You have yet to prove your point is anything other than your opinion. What I stated was supported by evidence, and was not a lie. I might be wrong, but you have yet to prove even that. You have not provided a source to support that USA no longer is smuggling guns to Latin America. The facts, that even Fox News corroborated, show that you are incorrect.

[Hindsite]

It's akin to the same thing. They might be wrong, but no one here is "lying". You have yet to prove your point is anything other than your opinion. What I stated was supported by evidence, and was not a lie. I might be wrong, but you have yet to prove even that. You have not provided a source to support that USA no longer is smuggling guns to Latin America. The facts, that even Fox News corroborated, show that you are incorrect.

“Operation Fast and Furious" under the Obama administration has ended.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/01/ ... t-scandal/

There is no evidence the the Trump administration is permitting any such thing. I already provided a source that stated Trump signed an executive order to crack down and prevent such actions.

[Godstud]

Signing an executive order does not stop something from happening. can you prove that smuggling has stopped, because of this?

No. You cannot.

[Hindsite]

Signing an executive order does not stop something from happening. can you prove that smuggling has stopped, because of this?

No. You cannot.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/02 ... 486659023/

[Godstud]

Do you read what you post? There is nothing there about gun smuggling, or it stopping because Trump told them to stop it.

Ordering something does not mean that you stop something from happening, otherwise the war on drugs would have been over 30+ years ago.

[Hindsite]

:eh: Do you read what you post? There is nothing there about gun smuggling, or it stopping because Trump told them to stop it.

Ordering something does not mean that you stop something from happening, otherwise the war on drugs would have been over 30+ years ago.

They still got many of the guns that the Obama administration let them have and the Democrats will not provide the needed funds to build the wall and provide other need security measures. However, Trump is doing all he can within his power to stop the crime. There is still drug smuggling, but there has been no proof of any firearms being smuggled from the USA across the border under the Trump administration. All you have is old reports, nothing new.

[Godstud]

May 25, 2019
Guns from the United States are flooding Latin America
https://www.economist.com/the-americas/ ... in-america

You have nothing for an argument. You're wrong and simply afraid to admit it. This seems to be a recurring theme these days.

"Fake news!"

"Liar!"

That's the extent of your arguments.

[Hindsite]

May 25, 2019
Guns from the United States are flooding Latin America
https://www.economist.com/the-americas/ ... in-america

You have nothing for an argument. You're wrong and simply afraid to admit it. This seems to be a recurring theme these days.

"Fake news!"

"Liar!"

That's the extent of your arguments.

They are obviously referring to the "Fast and Furious" guns that were lost under the Obama administration. They do not state that they know when those guns left the USA. So that proves nothing new, since we already knew they were being used to commit crimes.

[Godstud]

They are referring to what is still happening. You are making up bullshit to defend a position you cannot defend.

Prove it is not still happening. If you can't, then you're wrong.

[Hindsite]

They are referring to what is still happening. You are making up bullshit to defend a position you cannot defend.

They are still happening with guns allowed into Mexico by "Operation Fast and Furious" under the Obama administration. Most of those guns were never recovered as a previous report stated.

[ingliz]

no proof of any firearms being smuggled from the USA across the border under the Trump administration.

If that were the case (It isn't... The Mexican government say around 2,000 guns a day are coming in).

Why do you have a government department (HSI) investigating firearms, ammunition, and explosive weapons smuggling to Mexico?

Homeland Security Investigations and its law enforcement partners target the illegal movement of U.S. origin firearms, ammunition, and explosive weapons with the ultimate goal of preventing the procurement of these items by drug cartels, terrorists, human rights violators, foreign adversaries, and other transnational criminal organizations and individuals that utilize these weapons to facilitate criminal activity and commit acts of violence.

[Godstud]

They are still happening with guns allowed into Mexico by "Operation Fast and Furious" under the Obama administration. Most of those guns were never recovered as a previous report stated.

You simply repeating the same bullshit over and over again without a source isn't an argument.

Please provide a source to support your claim that Trump's policy stopped all gun smuggling to Latin America. Problem solved, according to you.

[Hindsite]

Why do you have a government department whose sole job is investigating firearms, ammunition, and explosive weapons smuggling, then?

(CNN) - Here's a look at Operation Fast and Furious. From 2009-2011, the Phoenix Field Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), along with other partners, allowed illegal gun sales in order to track the sellers and purchasers, who were believed to be connected to Mexican drug cartels.

During the Fast and Furious investigation, nearly 2,000 firearms were illegally purchased for $1.5 million, according to a DOJ inspector General report. Hundreds of guns were later recovered in the United States and Mexico.

In 2010, two of the weapons linked to Fast and Furious turned up near the scene of the murder of US Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in the Arizona desert.

Whistleblowing led to investigations by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. During the House investigation, Attorney General Eric Holder was cited for contempt.
Fast and Furious was one of the operations under Project Gunrunner, part of the Department of Justice's broader National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy.

July 12, 2011 - Sources tell CNN that an estimated 1,400 weapons were lost by the ATF.

https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/27/world/am ... index.html