No way this actually happens, right?
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/306370-trump-weighing-muslim-registry-says-adviser
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/306370-trump-weighing-muslim-registry-says-adviser
Trump Weighing Muslim Registry
- Thread starter bqknight
- Start date
One of his advisors said they could propose to Trump reinstating the registry for all immigrants and visitors. Read more than the title.
Thanks Bob, I did. It's for all immigrants and visitors from countries deemed, "high risk". There was a reason the database was gotten rid of in the first place.
You realize WAYYYY more people die from domestic issues than from foreign terrorists, right?
You also realize half the time someone does something here, they were already on a list but due to our wonderful non-existent gun laws, they still got guns.
They're just going to be put on this list so we can corral them into certain neighborhoods to make sure we can keep an eye on them and then if they still get too uppity, we can send them to camps where they can concentrate on how to be good citizens. *
Oh, non-existent gun laws! There it is!
You used to be somewhat rationale on here. Now you've turned into just another raging left wing lunatic. Recenter yourself and come back to earth.
First let me help you out, bring statistics, not what you feel. Ecause tou have yet to. E right about much. What the bell is domestic issues? Do you mean domestic terrorism, doubtful. Now from murders, yup and for the most that will never change but as a tax paying American I have no desire to open our doors to people that can't be vetted properly.
Anything to enforce arrest sex abusers.
As for Muslims, it won't be hard to find and register them. Muslims sit out in the open and make their contempt for us completely known. Their ridiculous customs and style of dress represent their feeling of moral superiority and refusal to assimilate.
I don't think guns are the issue in this country, I think we've got a violent culture problem. That's not fixed by taking guns away; I don't think there is a fix for that in a free society. And saying a terror attack won't happen if guns aren't available isn't true either; look at the Nice attack earlier this year for an example. That attack killed more people than Pulse and didn't include guns or explosives.
I don't think guns should be taken away, I personally hate them but I understand people have the right to get one. I think certain guns shouldn't be available to the public, there is zero need for them.
I do agree with the violent culture sentiment though. I do think it's amplified in the USA compared to other "western countries" though. Like you said, not sure how you fix that, not quickly anyway.
Question, what do you think the original intent of the second amendment was for? I ask that because Ive notice a lot of people freaking out about Trump and suddenly it seems a lot of lgbt people are afraid of the government. Those were the same people just a few weeks ago claiming people shouldnt have guns and are crazy for thinking the government would turn on them.
I'm not quite sure what the question or comparison is here? I'll gladly respond, I just don't see how the two are comparable.
Just to note again, I do not think the government should just take away all guns. Certain guns have no use or positive for the general public. It's the right to bear arms, not the right to an assault rifle.
I can understand a stance either way on the bolded. It's interesting that the debate will quickly deteriorate into absolutes - either you should or shouldn't have guns - when most of the discussion centers on extension of the right to specific firearms.
The 2nd Amendment discussion I'd like to see is how does it apply in the Digital Age. Many who feel the Constitution is a living document seem to pick and choose when to take that position. The 2nd Amendment in 18th century definition of "arms" is both offensive and defensive. Fast forward to a digital age and I don't think it's out of the question for individuals to have digital "arms" to protect from Government invasion of privacy.
I'm not at all in favor of ANY registry at the Federal level for ANY reason. However the hypocrisy on this is just astounding.
Deny people their Constitutional 2nd Amendment rights because they're on a vague Washington registry list = NO PROBLEM!
Deny people entry on a temporary visa because they're on a vague Washington registry list = NAZISM AND FASCISM!
Deny people their Constitutional 2nd Amendment rights because they're on a vague Washington registry list = NO PROBLEM!
Deny people entry on a temporary visa because they're on a vague Washington registry list = NAZISM AND FASCISM!
If laws exist to register gun owners, then the same should go for Muzzies.
