The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2013, 03:59 PM   #26
ant1999e
Ring of Famer
 
ant1999e's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 6,353

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Money Ball
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
Let the propaganda begin.
Romney was a bully...
ant1999e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 09:49 AM   #27
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
I dispute there is anything the ATF does wth more of our money that will make us safer. They are out looking for big time gun smugglers, people not paying tax on ciggs and alcohol, and checking on felons for possessing or trying to possess firearms.
And the fact that they are so crippled in their mission (which is to enforce current gun laws) that they can only audit dealers once every 17 years on average (you know, to make sure gun dealers are complying with laws) isn't a problem?

Quote:
Really nothing in that mission is stop a person from going crazy and shooting up a school. So i dispute this issue has anything to do with the fact the NRA fights TO KEEP THE ATF FROM BEING A TOOL USED TO INFRINGE ON LAWFUL GUN OWNERS RIGHTS.
What infringing actions has the NRA prevented the ATF from engaging in?

Quote:
The mother jones article trying to connect these horrid crimes to the fact the atf didn't have a permanent director is a joke. They were off running guns to mexico not trying to keep schools safe so i don't want to hear your inane argument that because the ATF has been nuetered by the NRA we are unsafe.
Two strawmen in one paragraph. Good job.

Quote:
In fact i agree with dismantling the ATF and giving there duties to other agencies. If the NRA stopped that then i would disagree with them. Still though it would not make me anymore safe or unsafe either way.
You've made it clear now that you don't care if existing gun laws are enforced or not, and seem to have a major hard-on for getting rid of the ATF (again, the agency tasked with enforcing those laws) for some reason.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:20 AM   #28
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

I used to work in a bank. The federal regulators come once a yr to check all your forms and paperwork, crawl through computers and interview certain employees about bank policy and compliance with federal law.

So Fed how many times a yr do you think the govt should bother legal American businessman trying to make a living selling gun and ammo?

So you want more money for the ATF because you think that would make us safer? Can you elaborate how that would make us safer?

The reason the ATF is infringing is because they want to run studies about gun violence through the CDC that will end up being used to promote gun control law. Govt agencies are tasked with enforcing law and shouldn't be used to take away our freedoms given to us under the constitution. The only think the ATF should be doing is trying to crack down on big time gun running and smuggling. They were trying but their methods were shoddy police work.

i don't see why anyone would want to give that agency more money. We saw Waco, we saw fast and furious, it seems like they always fail in their mission.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:29 AM   #29
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

Also fed i would be all for stricter laws on guns. I'm just against bloated fed agencies that don't do their jobs well. Also i am against stricter laws for law abiding citizens. That is crazy to target legal gun owners instead of the problem.

Do we get crazies who take a legal gun and go off shooting people? yes we do but i don't think there is any laws you can make to stop that. You have to target crimnals not law abiding citizens. Targetting the people who are following the law is insane.

i'd rather see the ATF put trackers in guns that don't actually work. Then sell them off in a place like Chicago. The fact is most criminals fire their guns 3-4 times in the guns lifetime so i bet it would be awhile before they figured out something wrong with the gun. You could scoop them up right after just like drugs.

make the new laws about 20 yrs to life for felons caught with guns. If its your first offense or your not a felon yet then now you are, give them maybe 3 yrs in prison.

Change the prison system from a sit around and waste taxpayer money into a hard labor prison that benefits society and teaches criminals how to work.

But 10 million so the CDC can study gun violence and its effects on our health? Give me a break i can tell you that already. It's bad for our health when we get shot.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:33 AM   #30
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

i'd like to see numbers on something like how many of our gun homicides were commited by someone who had already been in prison before that, for another felony etc etc. I bet you would find if we just didn't let these people back out we would be a lot safer fed.

But hey go ahead and stop me from owning a rifle with a collapsable stock, a scope and a flash suppressor. yeah like that will make us safer in any ****ing way. No way can come up with a same argument. A Ruger ranch .223 without all those bells and whistles can compete with any .223 assault rifle. They are both semi auto, they both fire a .223, they both can hold the same clip.

Explain to me how an assault weapons ban will make us safer Fed i would love to hear you stammer about trying to do so. Start with the fact over 90% of gun deaths are from handguns.

The floor is yours motherjones.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:35 AM   #31
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
I used to work in a bank. The federal regulators come once a yr to check all your forms and paperwork, crawl through computers and interview certain employees about bank policy and compliance with federal law.

So Fed how many times a yr do you think the govt should bother legal American businessman trying to make a living selling gun and ammo?
Once a year seems like a good place to start. The current average is once every 17 years -- effectively never.

Quote:
So you want more money for the ATF because you think that would make us safer? Can you elaborate how that would make us safer?
You don't think making sure gun dealers are not selling to criminals, people obviously unfit, etc. will improve things? Again, this is just current law, not being enforced, that you seem perfectly happy to have continue.

Quote:
The reason the ATF is infringing is because they want to run studies about gun violence through the CDC that will end up being used to promote gun control law.
Nice story. Any evidence?

Quote:
Govt agencies are tasked with enforcing law and shouldn't be used to take away our freedoms given to us under the constitution.
Again, what rights are being violated by the ATF? The ATF is an ENFORCEMENT agency, not a governing body. You do know what enforcement means, right?

Quote:
The only think the ATF should be doing is trying to crack down on big time gun running and smuggling. They were trying but their methods were shoddy police work.

i don't see why anyone would want to give that agency more money. We saw Waco, we saw fast and furious, it seems like they always fail in their mission.
Maybe they'd have their **** together if they, you know, had real leadership instead of a part time director.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:37 AM   #32
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Now Obama just game 10 million for CDC to investigate how gun violence occurs? Give me a break that won't make us safer either fed. Do you really think it will? You would be better off giving the 10 million to sme mental health facility that at least tries to help people. at the notion the CDC will investigate guns and then we will be safer. That is the biggest load of liberal poo shoved out of Obamas ass yet.

Yeah, because trying to understand a problem isn't a good idea. Better to just blindly go about the status quo.

What's with the anti-intellectualism here? You do know that the CDC is tasked to study sociological issues related to gun violence, right?
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:39 AM   #33
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
i'd like to see numbers on something like how many of our gun homicides were commited by someone who had already been in prison before that, for another felony etc etc. I bet you would find if we just didn't let these people back out we would be a lot safer fed.
This from the IDIOT who was just b****ing about the CDC being tasked to STUDY EXACTLY THAT KIND OF THING.

You ****ING MORON!
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:42 AM   #34
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Cutt: Here's what the president has directed the CDC to study:

"http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/16/obama_gun_control_executive_orders_call_for_cdc_gu n_violence_research_17.html
Conduct research on the causes and prevention of gun violence, including links between video games, media images, and violence: The President is issuing a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control and scientific agencies to conduct research into the causes and prevention of gun violence. It is based on legal analysis that concludes such research is not prohibited by any appropriations language. The CDC will start immediately by assessing existing strategies for preventing gun violence and identifying the most pressing research questions, with the greatest potential public health impact. And the Administration is calling on Congress to provide $10 million for the CDC to conduct further research, including investigating the relationship between video games, media images, and violence.
Better understand how and when firearms are used in violent death: To research gun violence prevention, we also need better data. When firearms are used in homicides or suicides, the National Violent Death Reporting System collects anonymous data, including the type of firearm used, whether the firearm was stored loaded or locked, and details on youth gun access. Congress should invest an additional $20 million to expand this system from the 18 states currently participating to all 50 states, helping Americans better understand how and when firearms are used in a violent death and informing future research and prevention strategies.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:36 AM   #35
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

BS those things are studying BS. Movies and violent games? Sorry that is freedom of speach its up to parents to keep that from kids not the govt.

Yeah they want to study the BS side of gun violence. The suicide, where the gun came from, and not just the fact they let felons back on the streets to commit more crimes.

The problem with the CDC studying guns to come up with better gun control is that the govt should not be spending our money to come up with a way to infringe on our rights to own guns. The money should all be spend keeping criminals in prison. That is how they would make us safer.

More and more money to keep people locked up. Then reform prisons to make them all hard labor.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:37 AM   #36
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

just more liberal crap blaming the govt for not raising their kids right.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 12:04 PM   #37
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

But I have no problem with gun dealers being checked up on Fed. But a physical check on each one every yr when there are so many probably a waste. You can just check the paperwork. If guns sold by a dealer keep ending up on the black market then you investigate. but crawling up the ass of legal gun dealers won't make us safer.

Your whole reason is to make us safer. Only way to do that is keep people locked up.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 12:18 PM   #38
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
BS those things are studying BS. Movies and violent games? Sorry that is freedom of speach its up to parents to keep that from kids not the govt.

Yeah they want to study the BS side of gun violence. The suicide, where the gun came from, and not just the fact they let felons back on the streets to commit more crimes.

The problem with the CDC studying guns to come up with better gun control is that the govt should not be spending our money to come up with a way to infringe on our rights to own guns. The money should all be spend keeping criminals in prison. That is how they would make us safer.

More and more money to keep people locked up. Then reform prisons to make them all hard labor.
In simple terms, the CDC is supposed to study:

1. Causes of gun violence
2. How to prevent guns from being used in crime

That you oppose those two lines of study is stupid.

None of that is aimed at infringing on rights.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 12:24 PM   #39
ZONA
Ring of Famer
 
ZONA's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 10,737

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Chris Harris
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
Well peace keystone pipeline back on now that nebraska has a new route. Let's see how important jobs are to Obama. IMO his policies cost us jobs. I still don't see anything from him that creates a lot of jobs. What will gun control and gays marrying do for jobs? What will more taxes do for jobs?
Whoa whoa - his policy cost up jobs? You're gonna have to be more specific then that my friend. That to me sounds like a blanket statement that the person saying it has no idea of what the policies are and is just saying something to look smart and opinionated.

First off - congress vetoed every jobs bill Obama put in place all in hopes that he would come off looking bad, that the unemployment would not go up. So we can thank Congress plenty for a prolonged lack of job creation. Secondly, there are only so many jobs the president and congress could even make. Everybody always wants to blame the president like he has some magic wand and can create jobs on the fly if he wants to. Let's get real. Third, your repub friends want to keep policy as it is so that companies can continue to get tax credits for shipping jobs over seas where they labor is dirt cheap. Yeah, that does alot for creating jobs. And how about Detroit. Your guy wanted to let the whole thing go down the drain, including millions of jobs. Fine, not saying switch parties but don't be so GD blind about this stuff. I'm not saying Obama is perfect but president but who was. You think if John McCain had been in the white house there would be millions of new jobs all of a sudden, cmon man, don't be stupid.

Last edited by ZONA; 01-24-2013 at 12:26 PM..
ZONA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 01:34 PM   #40
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

A stimulus that obama calls a jobs bill doesn't make it a smart jobs bill. Obviously the govt could print more money, then hire people to do stupid things like study if video games make kids want to kill johnny. The point is big govt doesn't work they need to stimulate in the private sector by removing regulations on energy, lowering corp tax, and changing the tax code to give a lower rate to money made overseas in return for those companies having to bring back a certain % of profits made overseas.

The reason companies dont bring profits home is they already paid a bunch of tax in the host country. Paying another 35% to bring it to the USA just would be stupid. The only way to get that money home is by cutting the worldwide corp tax rate and making it a different rate then domestic profits.

Go ahead though keep thinking govt spending will fix this.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 01:53 PM   #41
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,338

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
A stimulus that obama calls a jobs bill doesn't make it a smart jobs bill. Obviously the govt could print more money, then hire people to do stupid things like study if video games make kids want to kill johnny. The point is big govt doesn't work they need to stimulate in the private sector by removing regulations on energy, lowering corp tax, and changing the tax code to give a lower rate to money made overseas in return for those companies having to bring back a certain % of profits made overseas.

The reason companies dont bring profits home is they already paid a bunch of tax in the host country. Paying another 35% to bring it to the USA just would be stupid. The only way to get that money home is by cutting the worldwide corp tax rate and making it a different rate then domestic profits.

Go ahead though keep thinking govt spending will fix this.
They go overseas so they can pay some schmuck $5 week. Wouldn't make a differance whatthe tax rate is. Look no further than the last 10 yrs while the gwb tax cuts were in place,they shipping jobs overseas by the thousands.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 02:10 PM   #42
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,123

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
They go overseas so they can pay some schmuck $5 week. Wouldn't make a differance whatthe tax rate is. Look no further than the last 10 yrs while the gwb tax cuts were in place,they shipping jobs overseas by the thousands.
You're expecting Cutt to actually grasp the topic -- something he proves on a daily basis is completely beyond him.

He prefers a good ideological rant with plenty of ad hominems, strawmen, red herrings and appeals to ridicule (among may other dishonest tactics).
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:17 PM   #43
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
You're expecting Cutt to actually grasp the topic -- something he proves on a daily basis is completely beyond him.

He prefers a good ideological rant with plenty of ad hominems, strawmen, red herrings and appeals to ridicule (among may other dishonest tactics).
BS lots of non republicans have talked about our single corp tax system. Written for a day when very little money was made overseas.

Now that billions made overseas we should do our best to entice corporations to bring that back into the American banking system rather then offshore it. The best way to do that is to drop the worldwide tax rate down but at the same time make a law requiring them to bring a certain % of that profit home. Right now people call it hiding the money, dodging taxes, but really its perfectly legal and the smart business move. You can't pay 50% tax in the host country, then bring those profits home to usa and pay another 35%.

Really you are all stuck on the fact our companies do business overseas but that is just fact of the world now. We need to get some of that money into our govt revenue stream. Corp tax reform is the single biggest thing Obama could do to increase jobs.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:20 PM   #44
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

I agree though Peacepipe companies go overseas to get cheaper labor. But that isn't the only reason. A lot of the big money overseas is in oil, mining etc. But obviously manufacturing has left for overseas.

Trying to reverse the fact manufacturing has went to China would be a big mistake. You have to develop new markets, not try to snatch back industries that have went overseas for manufacturing.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:21 PM   #45
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,227
Default

Also one more question. How does a pistol grip on a rifle make it more deadly. I really want to hear this explanation.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:10 AM.


Denver Broncos