DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Obama White House: Terrorists Will Stop Attacking If We Pass Gun Control Laws

Obama White House: Terrorists Will Stop Attacking If We Pass Gun Control Laws

Attacking If We Pass Gun Control Laws
Published December 4, 2015
Facebook0 Twitter0 livefyre440 Email Print

By Paul Joseph Watson | Info Wars

The Obama administration reacted to yesterday’s shooting in San Bernardino – likely carried out by a Muslim terrorist – by insisting that “common sense” gun laws will deter jihadists who are planning attacks.

Click here for video

Reporter Peter Doocy asked White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest: “Does the President really think that common sense gun laws would deter terrorists now that he has admitted that these two may have been terrorists?”

RELATED:

What Are the ‘Common Sense Gun Laws’ that Would Have Prevented the San Bernardino Massacre?
O'Reilly: Terror Spotlight on 'Weak' Obama; Americans Furious: 'Critical Mass Reached'

yep, thats the dumbest crap i've ever heard him say.

Oh my.......O is off his rocker. I feel bad for him. It's not like we don't already have laws against what happened.

i've been on the record saying i want some different stuff as far as gun control.

but i'm talking general population. criminal organizations don't care. france doesn't allow weapons, that didn't stop terrorist groups from shooting up the place.

same thing with the russian mob and such. they all have their ways to get a hold of weapons.

Obama is delusional.

[quote=EveDawg]Obama is delusional. [/quote

Delusional and a little daft

A little daft? Don't downplay things. That's what el-presidente' does.

Are you even surprised by this idiot anymore? With teh length of time it takes cops to come when called I will never give up my guns especially since they can't do much until after you have been shot or stabbed...not much use to me then.

I was trying to be nice to his supporters and probably cant write on this forum my feelings on barry soetoro

Razor we do have some common ground..good post.

And now we have AG Lynch saying her greatest fear in America is anti Muslim rhetoric.

Really?? We have people killing one another all over the country, a great divide in American humanity, claims of offensive feelings if someone looks cross eyed at you, the greatest debt in the history of this country, a failing education system and no societal accountability........

..........And her " greatest fear" is anti Muslim rhetoric. Holy cow! In case we don't know it, we are in BIG trouble.

You don't know what you don't know til you KNOW you don't know it.

Not just that but says middle aged white males are a bigger threat to America then isis..

This country is screwed..I'm glad I'm not a young person anymore..

I was telling my son last night, the biggest outcome of horrendous incidents of violent human acts is the lose of freedoms by the population...we are watching our freedoms disintegrate..

He was learning about the Patriot Act in school...

Once the Government is given full reign to 'protect it's citizens' without oversight and transparency...no longer "will the only thing we need to fear is fear itself" but the very protection that is protecting our freedoms...

One idea would be for the government to realize we are our own greatest enemy in this country and instead of worrying about anti Muslim rhetoric, address inner city violence, American sufferage, RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM (or at the very least, call it what it is), make a greater attempt at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and drug cartels, address poverty in the inner cities, address the failure of the education system in this country and stop the government enabling and make people accountable for their own lives.....all while feeling your greatest fear is anti Muslim rhetoric. Imagine that! But

Just the tip of the iceburg, which I feel quite certain some will try to tear apart. Those who do, feel free to offer your own suggestions.

how come you mentioned everything except you crazy white people constantly shooting up stuff?

man you guys blame everybody else, but refuse to look in the damn mirror.

man, it's getting really annoying people blaming crap on the inner city all the time.

i gotta sit and always be like "yea, our community got problems" but y'all never say crap about your own problems.

how about addressing you white women killing your own kids and always popping opiates from the doctor?

how about addressing the majority of sex offenders and child molesters are white men?

i'm tired of having to talk down on my own community while you freaking losers turn the other cheek every time one of your own does something stupid.

sick of this crap.

we was talking about this today at the gym. seem like the white community was more than happy to slam the muslims, cause it took ALL the attention off the PP shooter.

y'all love slamming everybody else that doesn't look like you, yet when one of your own does some stupid crap, no where near the amount of coverage.

the PP shot a freaking cop, yet he barely got any coverage. yet if one of us pops one, all you see on social media is "go back to africa".

man screw this country.

The answer will not be found, in my opinion, in a Government program, security control, or freedom reduction - because the root of the issues is the condition of the human heart.

I totally understand people wanting to do 'something' as do I. I wish the answer was a Utopia state but this is a morality issue, which cannot be legislated. If history has taught us anything, Prohibition of anything does not stop it. My understanding was that the Mafia was bred out of Prohibition, for example.

The question is how do you teach people that hate and killing are not the way and that the value of one's life is not greater or less than the other? Sounds idealistic, I know, but that is the reality of it - and cannot be legislated.

We rape, kill, murder, lie, cheat steal. We live life like there is no tomorrow with a mentality that we will life forever. People will hate and kill - unfortunately we have and always will - the methods just change over time.

Do we all we can? Absolutely - for sure. Gun management, gun control, ban all we can - that will for sure make us feel better and may help help for now. Document all folks coming into the country? Sure. get rid of Driver's licenses and go for a passport type ID for all.

Remember - that legislation is almost reactive and by the time it happens, a new avenue has opened up that makes the legislation obsolete. if murder is illegal, then why do we have murders? If speeding is illegal, why do we speed? If stealing is illegal..it goes on and on. You could make the argument that if we really valued life, we would remove cars from the road - i hear you.

My best solution? When we - as a people - start taking more interest and value in our neighbors, workers, and families - we have the opportunity to root this out before it becomes an issue. And I know this sounds cheesy and old school rehtoric but I am old and cheesy..

We life like there is no tomorrow with a mentality that we will live for ever...kind of weird how we think.

We blame the Government - but like I keep reminding my kids - the Government is not an "IT" but is made up of US Citizens - aka people- making decisions. In each government position sits a person that was born and raised in the US. Once we all take ownership of this 'thing' we call government, we maybe can change for the better.

How was hate stopped in the past? Was the world changed by violence? Who helped changed the world though peach and non-violence? That to me is how we start. Our children - my children - have the best chance of fixing this long term.

What can we do - WE as a people stop it b/c the Government is not everywhere - but we the people are.

thoughtful post.

deep appreciation.

You're not going to stop people from killing. If you ignore Obama stupid comments and look at history, people killed people long before guns were ever invented.

Yes, Dawg Traveler is a good poster. Have you read his takes in the Pure Football Forum? He is one of the few reasonable posters.

Your daft in the head if you think any of that sentiment is true.

The only truth is that a newer and more horrific event happened and took all the attention. Just like it always does.

What is the real shame is that soooo many horrible things are happening right now. I see a lot of bad things happening all across the board. It's not a racial competition to see who is worst. Trashy people are trashy people regardless of race or income. You can keep the racist crap to yourself.

Sit back my friend, this is going to take one hell of a long time...Do you see what has to be done before our children can fix it ?

First off, terrorists are no different then the gangs that run the streets now.. They find and feed off the kids who are lost and feel no one is there to love them..

Do you realize just how many children feel that way ? World wide..Millions. Homeless, hungry, no parent, single parent, alcoholic parent(s) drug addicted parent(s) abusive and non caring parent(s)..

It makes for easy targets for the bad people to reel them into the criminal ways of life or terrorist ways...Even children who have the best parents and education fall prey to evil ways as they grow into adults.

Terrorists, yeah its's a scary thought.. Doesn't scare me near as much as the gangs and the damn drugs that are ruining our children.. Drugs, yep now that's a pretty serious situation we are dealing with...As long as they are around so will be terrorists.

Poverty, sure would like to see more jobs and better living. Can't get a job so lets go rob and kill someone.. Hey better yet... sell some drugs.

Respect, How are children learning respect when the Teachers cops and parents don't have the authority to teach (whip) some respect into the children.

Yes there are some very good children and adults in the world. Unfortunately it's a very big and messed up world with a lot of troubled and pissed off people in it.

Just how long do you think it's going to take for children to change this mess ? Before the next world war ?




Are you sure about that ?

Yep..a lot of schnooks walking around.

I have.
I enjoy them.

Agree or disagree, I'm attracted to posts by thinkers... folks who have opinions (like everyone else), but can also show their thought process through the way they write.
(I blame Judith Short, my 7th grade English/Composition teacher for turning me into such a 'wordnerd'...)

In threads like these, I also like them to be thorough when they post. If I can read a 6-8 paragraph post that fully explores their POV, that's pure gold to me. I also think it's more efficient: I get lots of questions answered without having to ask, because the thoughtful poster takes care of much of that in those 6-8 paragraphs. (Also saves a lot of short 'explanatory posts' later in the thread... )

IMHO, we have a nice-sized list of posters here who always make me slow down and read for content. I can feel the heft behind their words, no matter what the subject matter might be- because they know how to lay down their thoughts in a skillful, communicative way. I don't even have to agree with their positions to give them mad respect. I simply appreciate the 'game' they bring.

In other words: I'm one of those guys who appreciates the extra effort.
Always.

Traveler's definitely on my 'must-read' list. A spot well-earned.

I wish he'd post on more threads, quite frankly.

Clem I love your stuff..think I've told that plenty...I'm going to work on a more tortuous writing style just for you.

Let's make drugs illegal. Then we wouldn't have addicts.

I don't think that gun control laws have anything to do with terrorists.

I think terrorists are a greater risk than gun control laws.

Means and methods...

Dawgtalker,
After that entire post, your answer was literally, teach the kids to be better people than we are! I will agree with my conservative friends that you can't make a gun law that catches every criminal situation. BUT, is someone on a watch list wants to purchase a gun, we should let them???

Even in the video that was posted, the reporter asked his question and the White House spokesmen basically said "Yes, we should pass common sense gun laws to make it harder for people who would do harm to the US to have guns". But when the White House spokesman asked the reporter "Why wouldn't we make it harder for Terrorists to purchase guns here?".. Now of course, good FAUX NEWS cut the video at that point!!! But that is the fundamental question, Why are we making it easy for terrorists to purchase guns here??

Now of course, some people who have guns want to recite the old"My freedoms" non-sense. You don't want your guns registered but tracking a person is ok?(* using forms of ID is used for tracking that person *). BTW - I own guns probably in the most restrictive city in the US, and its not a problem. If I need to use them, I will!!!

I can somewhat understand people not trusting the Gov with allowing certain people not to have guns, BUT I do not want to be "FREE" to be "DUMB" (* play on freedom *) and let terrorists get a gun when they want here either.

"tortuous."

I like that. Clever, for sure.

(I'm sure others would use that term to describe my posts, too...)

Passing more laws doesn’t keep terrorists from getting guns.


On Sunday, Hillary Clinton slammed Republicans for not being serious about protecting Americans from terrorism. “How many more Americans need to die before we take action?” Clinton asked in response to Friday’s shooting at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs. She believes that stopping such attacks involves “common-sense steps like comprehensive background checks, closing the loopholes that let guns fall into the wrong hands.” Within minutes of the attack in San Bernardino, Calif., yesterday, Clinton pushed again for more regulations.


Clinton also wants to crack down on terrorism by prohibiting people on the no-fly list from buying guns. “If you are too dangerous to fly in America, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America.”


Are Republicans really putting Americans in danger by opposing new gun-control laws?


After every mass shooting, Clinton and President Obama have called for “comprehensive” or “universal” background checks, which would apply not only to the purchase of guns from a dealer but also to private transfers of guns. However, it wouldn’t have stopped any of the mass shootings during Obama’s tenure. Last weekend, Clinton, Obama, and other Democrats issued their calls for new legislation before anyone even knew how the Colorado shooter had obtained his rifle.


Colorado had already expanded background checks two years ago. So had Oregon before the Umpqua Community College shooting in October. France also has a background-check system. So too does California, which experienced yesterday’s attack. Yet, while the existing laws didn’t stop shootings of the very kind Clinton claims that they will stop, she uses these failures to justify imposing similar laws on the rest of the country.


The American background-check system is supposed to prevent the purchase of a gun by anyone who has been convicted of a felony or certain misdemeanors. The Feinstein amendment would also ban the sale of guns to anyone who is on the terrorist watch list. Now, being on the watch list sure sounds bad, but it doesn’t mean that a person has been convicted of anything. In fact, it is pretty easy to get on the watch list; you can be on it simply because the FBI wants to interview you about someone you might know. According to the TechDirt website, about 40 percent of the people on the watch list are considered to be under “reasonable suspicion” even though they have absolutely “no affiliation with known terrorist groups.”


The number of people on the list has grown dramatically during the Obama administration; by 2013, there were about 700,000 people on the list. As of 2014, about 50,000 people were on the no-fly list. This is a ten-fold increase since Obama became president.


Between February 2004 and December 2014, over 2,000 people on the watch list bought one or more guns. The government has not identified a single one of these people as using a gun in a crime.


Should the government be able to deny you the right to protect yourself simply because it wants to ask you about someone you might know? And that isn’t the only problem posed by the proposed expanded background checks. In New York, today’s background checks add about $80 to the cost of transferring a gun. In Washington State, they add about $60. In Washington, D.C., they add $200. In effect, these laws put a tax on guns and can prevent less affluent Americans from purchasing them. This disproportionately affects poor minorities who live in high-crime urban areas.


While some people on “no-fly” lists are there because they are suspected of terrorist activity, you can also get added because you are a suspect in a criminal case, made controversial statements or tweets unrelated to terrorism, are the victim of a clerical error, or refused to become a government informant.


Not only do the terror watch and no-fly lists target many people who aren't really threats, they stop a lot of people who aren’t even actually on the lists. The late Senator Ted Kennedy was stopped from flying five times because someone with a similar name was on the no-fly list. Other prominent individuals such as The Weekly Standard’s Stephen Hayes have also run into this problem.


The error rate for identifying potential terror threats is probably similar to the error rate for background checks on gun purchases. Over 94 percent of "initial denials" for gun purchases are dropped after just a preliminary review. These cases were dropped either because the wrong person had been stopped or because the covered offenses were decades old and the government decided not to prosecute. The total error rate comes to about 99 percent.


Putting people on a list and prohibiting them from legally purchasing guns doesn’t really stop them from getting weapons. The fact that people are prohibited from buying certain drugs doesn’t mean people can’t get them. It’s the same with guns. And, incidentally, drug gangs supply both illegal drugs and illegal guns.


Indeed, since Clinton wants to make a comparison to last week’s Paris attacks, we should point out that France’s strict weapon bans didn’t stop the terrorists from getting the AK-47s and explosive belts they used in the attacks. Strangely, the Oregon, Colorado, California, and Paris shootings are being used to push for additional gun-control laws of the sort that failed to prevent those attacks.

— John R. Lott Jr.is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author of More Guns Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, 2010).


Link

While we are at it can we make sex out of wedlock illegal also. That's sure to put an end to that.

Here its easy to get rid of firearms in America..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnoFKskvSq4

This is a joke, kind of.

Just clicking...

First, I am a firm believer that guns aren't the problem. The problem is people.

The best way to reduce gun violence is for more people to feel that they have something to lose if they commit a crime. Too many of our citizens live without hope for the future. We have to find ways to include them in the American Dream. Our leaders need to do everything they can to promote business and jobs creation. People with jobs that give them a small slice of the pie are less likely to commit crimes over someone in poverty.

People who feel worthless become angry people who have no regard for human life. They just don't care.

Be careful mate your starting to sound like me and that wills care people =P

Tulsa,
I could write a long response, but before read/believe everything, you might have wanted to look at my post name.
So then when I see this

"Should the government be able to deny you the right to protect yourself simply because it wants to ask you about someone you might know? And that isn’t the only problem posed by the proposed expanded background checks. In New York, today’s background checks add about $80 to the cost of transferring a gun. In Washington State, they add about $60. In Washington, D.C., they add $200. In effect, these laws put a tax on guns and can prevent less affluent Americans from purchasing them. This disproportionately affects poor minorities who live in high-crime urban areas."

Not sure about the rest of that but I know the Washington DC cost is total bull!! You can get a gun without that huge additional cost. But again, what is your solution??? Again, So if laws are not the answer, then what??? Just let them keep shooting?

why not just let people keep shooting?

thats what it boils down to.

we're gonna keep having mass shootings, drive bys, censered for profanity off girlfriends/boyfriends, etc, but hey, we need our weapons just in case the government takes them from us.

and yet nobody on this board realizes we're already doing the government's work for them. Guns here in America is like the shiny red button. everybody knows you probably shouldn't push it, but we're gonna do it anyway because freedom.