The Concealed Handgun License process is very extensive, at least in Texas. You have to fill out an application and submit a non-refundable $145. Have to get fingerprinted on your own time and dime (even though mine are already on file due to working in school administration). The application takes several months to process, and there are VERY stringent criminal record requirements for you to pass. No guarantee You also have to take and pass a CHL class, the shooting requirements for which are fairly easy though. I imagine there are quite a good number of people who do take advantage of the gun show loophole, though there's no way to get a number on it. Any reputable seller is going to still do a background check at the show, although I've seen booths advertise that they don't require background checks. It sickens me. I agree that requiring background checks won't do much of anything, especially when compared to addressing the larger issue of mental healthcare in this country. However, at least it does something. And it is one of those common sense things that should have been done a long time ago (why they ever created ways to get around background checks I don't know or understand). No risk, all reward. Like I said, at least it's something.
This might hold water if the Republicans in Congress where anywhere approaching reasonable, but they aren't. Obama "compromising" means bending over backwards completely and conceding everything. Fuck that. And what compromises did Republicans ever offer him? Last I checked his signature achievement was Obamacare, which Republicans have been trying to repeal since it was passed.
Dude, Obama is host to the most hostile congress, possibly ever. He is easily the most disrespected man with access to the Button. Remember the "you lie!" Guy from South Carolina? Why bother reasoning with that crowd when the moderate conservatives are being crowded out? The republican bases hate for Obama stems from racism and ethnocentrism. You can't debase yourself arguing and compromising with those people when you won a historic election. Because there's no win in it. He won the fucking elections, why is his the side that bears responsibility to compromise? Even Obama care started out as a Romney program...he borrows the idea from the guy he beat and suddenly is an unconstitutional policy? His birth certificate comes into question when Ted Cruz, who was born Canadian, is assumed to be a red blooded American? Obama has suffered for being a progressive candidate in a time where conservatives are not likely to play by the rules. Trumps success is demonstrating that this whole "anti-politics political party" strategy isn't panning out. I get that he does his own thing, and that irks people. What I don't get is how it's suddenly ok to ridicule and disrespect the man I charge. Even Bush never got this level of shit thrown at him...-and he arguably deserved it more.
Do you think Bush would have similar levels of shit if Twitter and Facebook were a thing when he was in office? Gotta consider the methods of delivering criticism. They're literally at your fingertips today. Even a mere 10 years ago it took readers, talent, a voice or a platform, hell something halfway substantial to be heard. Now? Just make a good line and finish it with a trending hashtag.
Maybe I'm just in my liberal bubble, so I want some examples of this. First thing he compromised: his idea of universal healthcare for a Republican idea. From where I am, he helped navigate the country out of impending financial doom, passed healthcare reform that has yet to implode the country and seems to have more positives than negatives, done decently well in managing the hydra of terrorism which was put in place entirely by his Republican predecessor (you might remember that guy, you know the one who started a pointless war in Iraq by deceiving the American people only to drop the ball in the war we were fighting in Afghanistan), and hasn't totally shit the bed on anything else. I'm not a big fan of this executive action, but the funny thing is, you could put a Republican in office, make this about some bullshit pet issue, and conservatives would praise his decisiveness and his cojones. "He is just getting shit done rabble rabble rabble!" The guy isn't a saint, but good lord do people have it out for him based on little to no actual reason. Maybe you do have actual and tangible reasons. I'm open to being wrong. Hit me with some specific examples and I'll reconsider. Or feel free to just continue rage shit ad hominem attacks.
If you think he's done a decent job of containing terrorism and that Bush is solely responsible for creating ISIS, I'm not sure if providing specific examples is going to amount to anything or will give you cause to reconsider any of your views. But hey, why not. Go read up on the sequestration deal from a few years back. That was really the turning point in his relationship with congress. And it's lazy and predicable to think that because I criticize Obama that would excuse a Republican from doing the same when I've derided them countless times before. Executive Action should not be used to go around a house of government, whether it's Reagan, Obama, or anyone. It's abusing a tool that was put in place for war time action, not because "Congress is mean, I'm going to do what I want instead."
Pssshaw, I never said Bush was solely responsible creating ISIS. I'm sure Obama could have played it all better. However, he was handed that dumpster fire full stop. I've always viewed Obama's relationship as Congress as tainted. Long before the sequestration nonsense. And while you may have grumbled and criticized, I highly doubt you called George W. Bush a shitty human being. Maybe I'm wrong. Edit* should have said he was handed the whole dumpster fire of Iraq full stop.
Clutch, all fair criticisms. However, while you can balk at some specifics the country is not in financial ruin. Could it have been better? Sure. Okay, let's punt on Obamacare. And your anecdotal $500 is negated by the fact that I was unemployed and was able to stay on my parent's insurance until I was 26. That was nice. Again, the ISIS situation isn't all rainbows and sunshine. Libya was a fuck up. But not catastrophic by any means. And sure the stupidity thing is fine. Here is my point. This thread jerks itself off with righteousness (you're probably saying I'm guilty of this, and maybe I am). However, calling someone a shitty human being for any of the above is ridiculous. The invective thrown at Obama for what really amounts to "policy decisions that could have been more ideal" is fucking ridiculous. There are legitimate criticisms of Obama. But all that gets lost when people lose sight of being semi-reasonable.
You know, I find nothing in that to be out of line or unreasonable. It seems like fairly common sense type stuff, if you ask me. Am I wrong?
The only thing I see, and it needs to be more clear, is it appears if you were diagnosed with, say depression, 20 years ago you could be disqualified from buying a firearm without due process. How many people that need mental health treatment are going to avoid it because it may keep them from buying a gun?
The part about gun safety is intriguing to me. The technology is already out there for "fingerprint safeties." Essentially the gun will only fire if the person holding it is registered as being allowed to fire it -- there are fingerprint sensors where the shooter's fingertips would be in a traditional shooting position. Combine this with a national database on people prohibited from owning or using a firearm and you have a damn good safety feature (for example, the firearm could update the database every time it encounters wifi, or it could mandate you connect the gun to Internet once a month to update or it won't fire).
There was something in there about being deemed incapable of handling your own affairs and/or an active danger to yourself or others. As someone who has been treated for depression like you talk about, I wasn't alarmed at all. I understood it to mean only the extreme cases. When I was in treatment, if one of my doctors felt that I was a danger to myself, they also could, legally, have the firearms removed from my possession against my will. Never happened, not even close. But I imagine it's for cases like that.
Which would leave it wide open to being hacked. Also it would provide the government with a very easy way to disable guns.
It's not practical at this point, and is something that I would consider more of a proof of concept than anything as the technology sits. I was actually quite happy with the wording around that, whereby they didn't mandate a solution, but rather a focus on serious R&D on finding something that will work.
Oh, and there's no way in hell that any kind of "active" or online gun DRM will be allowed or considered... people refuse it in video games, never mind guns.
Exactly. That part made me the most happy of all of it. It wasn't "let's do this and this and this," but rather more like "we have an opportunity for improvement in this area, so let's look into what is feasible."
That's because if you compare Obama to a monkey, you automatically become a racist. Remember when this was deemed a "racist" cartoon, and the artist was subjected to death threats? That cartoon was written after a chimp went "ape-shit" and bit her handler's face off; it was in all of the news outlets. That malady happened to coincide with one of Obama's moves (which didn't amount to anything). EDIT: Here's the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/18/new-york-post-chimp-carto_n_167841.html
I have to like the guy personally no matter what? Why? I think Donald Trump is a pretty shitty human being too and wouldn't vote for him, do you equally take issue with that also? I know you're not one of the bottom-feeders on this board that just claims racism any time the guy is criticized, and if you like and support him more power to you. I've given Obama the benefit of the doubt and credit where it's been due, howver I think he has little integrity and don't like him as a person. It's that simple. But I can criticize (or praise) the guy and not like what his opponents are doing either. I don't understand why me not liking him automatically means I support everything they're doing. Well to be fair, the people who commit mass shootings are avoiding it already. Healthcare privacy laws are fucked up in that background checks can't touch medical records. So some guy might pass a criminal background check if he hasn't been convicted of a crime, but it won't take into account that he has been committed for schizophrenia. And I agree there has to be some sort of appeals process in place, but we need to have at least some stop-gaps. As for Dixie's comic/article above, I don't know man. I'm the last person to throw down the racism card, but it's very tough to think that's anything but.