This is a discussion on Good arguement for background checks within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Well, on second thought......
It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.
It's early yet, but so far the biggest laugh I've had today. On another note, it's sad and scary all at the same time.
Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.
...from the reports:
FBI Investigated Boston Terror Suspect 2 Years Ago | Boston Bombers | Fox Nation
...the FBI did their job thoroughly...even interviewing the mother of the older of the two...and interviewing him...and found nothing...
...the younger was around 17...they had no cause to investigate him, and didn't
...it was about two years ago when the older went overseas for 6 months, wasn't it???it was before the investigation...the Russians are the ones who requested the investigation...his trip was primarily to Russia...
As I have told everyone who argues for more back ground checks, they argue that it will keep arms from criminals, I keep telling them over and over again, law abiding gun owners already go through back ground checks, criminals won't bother, instead they go to back alleys to buy their arms.
I wouldn't be so quick as to say the FBI did their job thorougly. How much intel did they recieve from Russia? Did they request more? Did they truly do an investigation or did they simply cover their asses? Inerviewing the def. and mom, to me, does not constitute an investigation. I am not blaming the FBI because they get their orders from the white house, but thorough is a very subjective word.
went to the CIA with concerns about those two, too.
IMO most folks who migrate to the US have little interest in returning to the old country. They want out, and away, and
have little desire to return. These folks apparently felt persecuted in Russia, got asylum here, and then they WENT BACK?????
Geez, you couldn't have paid my grandparents or my dad enough money to go back to Russia.
Yikes. If that return isn't a red flag that something is really wrong I can't imagine what is.
If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
YiIts only a "red flag" if you notice it.kes. If that return isn't a red flag that something is really wrong I can't imagine what is.
With things being upside down these days,if they did happen to notice, they may have let it slide so that they wouldn't be accused of "profiling" them.
Stranger things have happened.
I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
The only valid argument I can see for the utility of background checks (beyond questions of its constitutionality) is: if it could be shown if a significant majority of violent felons and adjudicated "mentals" on the NICS list actually never again ended up with weaponry. Until that can be shown, it's utility is merely a pipe dream.
Irrespective of that, it still remains an unconstitutional infringement upon the RKBA, IMO, as it essentially denies the right of citizens to own or carry arms.
They already have laws and rules that simply don't work. Our government has FAR too much bureaucracy to EVER be efficient. Expanded background checks are nothing more than an illusion to hide the ever tightening stranglehold on our rights by a government that increasingly becomes despotic in its attempts to feed itself money and power.
You do know they were getting WELFARE. (imagine that on a terrorist watch list & getting public assistance...GREAT COUNTRY AMERICA !