I dont get the question...I agree this is not a POTUS directive, but I personally dont see any partisan dickbaggery in this story. I was simply correcting your statement. Last I knew, 2016 was a Democrat administration.
*shrug*
It's all good, man. Just wondering why the Trump rubble doesn't get all huffy over this gun grab. Yes, I agree this seems like a strange piece of "news" considering how it happens every year. My point is that, I'm simply observing that the Trumptards and repubs are making no hay over this at this moment where you and I both know that this would be yet another Obama disaster if the "grabbing" were reported then.
Funny that the stats are from 2016, which would mean the errors occurred under the Obama admin and now are being corrected under a rep admin. I'm no Trump / rep fanboy, but many of you dems have lost your minds.
Yes, these people should have their guns impounded until a proper background check can be performed. If they pass, they get their guns back as the existing laws would imply. If they fail, they lose their guns and should be compensated as they never should've been allowed to buy said weapon(s) in the first place. This is just another example of big government doing what it does best - screw sh*t up.
What you and your fellow morons don't get is the hypocrisy you stupid fuckers exhibit daily. This is yet another example of that. Under Obama we had years of "he's taking our guns", under trump? 'this is normal, nothing to see here'.
Pathetic pieces of shit, every one of you.
Ahahaaha
It's all good, man. Just wondering why the Trump rubble doesn't get all huffy over this gun grab. Yes, I agree this seems like a strange piece of "news" considering how it happens every year. My point is that, I'm simply observing that the Trumptards and repubs are making no hay over this at this moment where you and I both know that this would be yet another Obama disaster if the "grabbing" were reported then.
What would happen if these well heeled boys showed up to take the guns?
This was ordered under the Obama administration and still no foam. We leave the foaming and the slavering incontinence to the people with Trump Derangement Syndrome.Yeah, I know you would have been cool with this if Obama and Pelosi were sitting there on top when this order came down.
Sure you would have. The foaming and rage...
What you and your fellow morons don't get is the hypocrisy you stupid fuckers exhibit daily. This is yet another example of that. Under Obama we had years of "he's taking our guns", under trump? 'this is normal, nothing to see here'.
Pathetic pieces of shit, every one of you.
Ahahaaha
apples and oranges
this is enforcement of existing
obama wanted to change the laws to make it harder, if not impossible to buy a gun.
and bring back the awb, or just plain outlaw all of them if he could
As mdram said, the current admin is enforcing existing laws. I have no issue with this and if the Obama admin had done this I wouldn't have had an issue with that either. In fact, if the lazy sods in the Obama Air Force had done their job and had that nut-job entered into the NICS database, that slaughter in Texas might have been averted.
Now be a good little boy and go deepthroat your Obama doll and let adults talk.
All it will take is a couple more Obama-esque SCOTUS appointments and the 2nd amendment could be effectively nullified.
All it takes is what we're already starting to see happen - any excuse by the .gov to call you mentally ill and you lose your guns.
Freedom is a fragile thing.
In light of recent developments in the firearm and ammunition marketplace, ATF sought input from industry, law enforcement organizations, and the general public on the application of the unique "sporting purpose" exemption set forth in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C). In November 2012, ATF held four meetings with interested parties representing law enforcement, the firearms and ammunition industries, and non-governmental organizations. In addition, after completion of these meetings, ATF also solicited and accepted comments from the general public through December 31, 2012. All of that input was considered in interpreting the meaning of the statutory language, and developing the framework described below.
Lol! Sure you wouldn't!
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/will-2nd-amendment-stand-forever.2315581/page-3#post-34924832
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/will-2nd-amendment-stand-forever.2315581/
Again, you bitches are hypocrites.
Zero guns taken away under Obama = Obama is going to take our guns.
Enforcement of rules that will require taking away guns under a trump admin = its a good thing
Isnt it crazy that the rule currently is if the background check is not complete in 3 days the sale can go forward? What the hell kind of rule is that?
maybe because people that own guns, and know the system, know that this happens regularly?
This was ordered under the Obama administration and still no foam. We leave the foaming and the slavering incontinence to the people with Trump Derangement Syndrome.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/23/trump-derangement-syndrome-only-gets-democrats-so-/
Lol! Sure you wouldn't!
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/will-2nd-amendment-stand-forever.2315581/page-3#post-34924832
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/will-2nd-amendment-stand-forever.2315581/
Again, you bitches are hypocrites.
Zero guns taken away under Obama = Obama is going to take our guns.
Enforcement of rules that will require taking away guns under a trump admin = its a good thing
So another form of whataboutisum?So, Obama's people didn't grab the guns, but Trump's people did?
(yes, I know this is neither POTUS' directive, but I'm trying to play extreme partisan dickbaggery that I learned from my brainless republican neighbors)
So another form of whataboutisum?
More like pointing out your hypocrisy.
Here, i'm gonna help you out son. This is what hypocrisy is...
Feminists - All sex with men is rape. All women must be believed when they report sexual harassment; they'd never lie about something like that. The accusation is enough.
Bill Clinton - Known for doing a Trump with anything in a skirt. Accused of rape.
Hillary - Actively worked to suppress the women who were accusing Bill
James Carville - You can't believe these women! This what you get when you run $100 through a trailer park!
Feminists - <crickets> Oh wait! There was a journalist that said she'd be willing to give Clinton a Lewinsky for keeping abortion legal. (google it).
That's hypocrisy, you dolt.
The Trump admin certainly has done things worthy of criticism, but actually enforcing federal gun laws isn't one of them. Now be a good little boy and go back to playing with your Obama doll.
I'm not talking about trump, dumb ass. I'm talking about you and others like you who complained about Obama doing things he didn't actually do to now praising trump for doing the things you used to complain about.
Its probably hard to follow because your head is so far up your ass.
And again, your infantile mind can't grasp that there's a difference here. I'm fine with background checks as I DON'T WANT felons and people who've demonstrated a propensity to violence (like the guy in Texas) to get guns. If the background check fails or can't be completed, no guns for you.
That being said, where I would be suspicious is a dem run admin that would have no qualms about goosing the database to ensure that people they don't like (vs legitimate reasons) fail the background check.
If you've really followed my posts, you'd realize that I'm pretty a-political as far as having any kind of party loyalty. I'm a bit right of center and slightly on the libertarian side of things. Unlike you, I do realize the subtle differences in situations. This particular one is a great example. Your shallow intellect only allows you to see things along party lines.
actually, the number for confiscations is up under trump.
well for getting guns from people that failed background checks anyway.
it seems obama admin didnt see that as a priority.
i bet they were hoping for violence, and they did get it
yes, the Obama admin was hoping for violence. This seems like a rational assumption.
Easy, you just lie about it. Keep the zerk in Berzerkeleybut Obama didn't take away the guns.
and yet again, an editorial with a title "Trump derangement syndrome."
You know how I know you continue to keep yourself blissfully uninformed?