Prism Program ( Big Brother gone too far?)

[Hurlshort]

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say universal background checks for guns is a much smaller step than the Patriot Act.

Hurlie two points:

 

1) If you have to ask the government for it's permission to enjoy a right is it really a right?

2) Despite that I'd still be in favor of universal background checks if, AND ONLY IF, no government state, local, or federal. would be involved in the process. You would not be dealing with an honest partner. 

 

I'd be in favor of background checks if it were really about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. But, it's just not about that at all. See my previous comment.

 

 

Would you be ok with it was state or local instead of federal?  I'm asking because it makes me think of the DMV.  While they have their bureaucratic BS like everything else, I don't really see them as some evil entity under the control of the white house.  

 

I'd be worried about a private company running those background checks for a lot reasons too.

 

It's not really a situation with an easy answer.  But I will tell you this, I had little interest in gun control until Sandy Hook, so events really do have a bearing on this discussion.   

[Wrath of Dagon]

I'm in favor of a universal gun check, but the argument against it is that it's ineffective. The criminals will just buy the guns illegally, and the mentally ill are not being reported. Still, it would help in a few cases.

[ShadySands]

I'm in favor of a universal gun check, but the argument against it is that it's ineffective. The criminals will just buy the guns illegally, and the mentally ill are not being reported. Still, it would help in a few cases.

 

My thoughts on it as well

[Zoraptor]

So, you're trying to prove that you won't and don't abuse your powers granted under the guise of anti-terrorism. How to do, how to do...

I know, we'll detain the partner of a journalist for nine hours under anti terror laws, when there isn't even the slightest indication he's even tangentially related to terrorism

 

That's sure to prove how responsibly we use our powers!

[Tagaziel]

The point being, while one guy against a tank will always lose, an armed populous in open rebellion stands a much better chance.

Uncle Joe would beg to differ.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I don't even think this thread is even worth lazily trolling anymore. I also keep reading the title as "BruceVC gone too far?" and assume that it is a complaint about romance threads. Speaking of romance, I'm going to have slightly drunk "romance time" with my girlfriend now.

Edited August 20, 2013 by KaineParker

[Wrath of Dagon]

So, you're trying to prove that you won't and don't abuse your powers granted under the guise of anti-terrorism. How to do, how to do...

I know, we'll detain the partner of a journalist for nine hours under anti terror laws, when there isn't even the slightest indication he's even tangentially related to terrorism

 

That's sure to prove how responsibly we use our powers!

The question I have is why The Guardian, an anti-American Marxist rag, would pay the travel expenses of their reporter's boyfriend (who doesn't work for them) to travel to Germany.

[Zoraptor]

Because he was picking up material from a source, for The Grauniad. That that material was going to inevitably be embarrassing to the US, or Britain, is irrelevant unless you think 'anti american Marxist rags' are terrorist. The detention was under an anti terror law auspice, not anything else, and it clearly was not anything to do with terrorism.

 

You could try imagining if it was Coulter/ Beck/ Hannity/ Limbaugh's partner being detained in that style and under those justifications, instead...

[Guard Dog]

A right can still be a right if it's granted as a matter of course. Driving a car is a right, but you wouldn't want habitual drunk drivers, those who are sufficiently bad drivers to fail a test repeatedly or the blind to be able to drive- as others have the right to safely use the roads as well. It's all in the application of the law but so long as it doesn't end up with something ludicrous like "asians have a disproportionate number of crashes, don't issue them licences" or similar it works fine and pretty much everyone agrees it's a good idea.

 

Whether owner licencing/ background checks would work well in the US where there are more guns and a lot more illegal guns is questionable though, as it would rely on most gun owners being responsible and reasonable and a lack of illegal alternatives.

Actually a drivers license is not a right. It IS a privilege and is specifically described as such by state laws. That is why they can take it away from you... which kind of makes my point actually! 

[Nepenthe]

So, you're trying to prove that you won't and don't abuse your powers granted under the guise of anti-terrorism. How to do, how to do...

I know, we'll detain the partner of a journalist for nine hours under anti terror laws, when there isn't even the slightest indication he's even tangentially related to terrorism

 

That's sure to prove how responsibly we use our powers!

Meant to post this yesterday, butvwas too much of a hassle on the tablet...

 

Anyway, not cool and in a flash has proved so many fears true...

[alanschu]

 

 

Why do you think the left wants gun control so badly? Do you really think they give a damn about crime or school shootings or yours or my safety? Gun control is not about any of those things. Politicians care about one thing; themselves.

Wouldn't the right be wanting to take your guns too, then?  Or are the right-wing politicians exempt?

 

It's fun to be a cynic, but just as there are those that feel having firearms is a good thing and beneficial to society, there are those that think that ultimately removing them would be beneficial to society as well.

 

I have little love for most politicians as well, but to say that they don't give a damn about crime, safety, or school shootings is a bit too fear mongering for my case.  I think it's fair that they DO care about those things, want them to stop, and feel this is an avenue to do so.  Whether or not it's actually a valid way of doing so is another question altogether.  Further, there's plenty of people that aren't politicians that the politicians echo.

 

 

A quick read through of this thread reminded me of this article a friend linked (especially the last point regarding cynicism)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-reasons-news-looks-worse-than-it-really-is/

 

Although the thesis has issues since you can apply the idea of the last point to the detractors as being cynical in order to avoid cognitive dissonance.  I more find it interesting because I have caught myself in that boat (much like the author) as well.  Then, I'm also learning that much of even our conscious thought appears to be somewhat uncontrolled.

[Guard Dog]

Alan there are many right wingers who are pro gun control. Mitt Romney, John McCain, Christie, Guliani, George H Bush, I could come up with a dozen or so if I think about it. However, the political right in the US tends to be more libertarian and right leaning politicians tend not to get reelected unless they follow. But I believe many if not most of them would be as quick to infringe on individual freedom if it suited them.

 

The left in the US tends heavily to statisim and the concept of individual freedom is quickly becoming the punch line of a joke to them.

[Nepenthe]

Who are the fasadists now?!

 

I'll get my coat.

[Malcador]

So, you're trying to prove that you won't and don't abuse your powers granted under the guise of anti-terrorism. How to do, how to do...

I know, we'll detain the partner of a journalist for nine hours under anti terror laws, when there isn't even the slightest indication he's even tangentially related to terrorism

 

That's sure to prove how responsibly we use our powers!

Have to appreciate Russia's honesty in some things - they'd have just started killing all the principals.

Edited August 20, 2013 by Malcador

[WDeranged]

Government agents also entered The Guardian's building and physically destroyed computer hardware...

 

"The man was unmoved. And so one of the more bizarre moments in the Guardian's long history occurred – with two GCHQ security experts overseeing the destruction of hard drives in the Guardian's basement just to make sure there was nothing in the mangled bits of metal which could possibly be of any interest to passing Chinese agents. "We can call off the black helicopters," joked one as we swept up the remains of a MacBook Pro."

Edited August 20, 2013 by WDeranged

[Walsingham]

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

I was going to, but instead decided to post lewd pictures of women on the internet.

[Walsingham]

 

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

I was going to, but instead decided to post lewd pictures of women on the internet.

 

We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet,Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street.It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first,Our wrath come after Russia's wrath and our wrath be the worst.It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our restGod's scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.

[Nepenthe]

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

Because writing to a Finnish mp is going to have an impact on the abuse of uk terrorism laws?

[BruceVC]

 

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

Because writing to a Finnish mp is going to have an impact on the abuse of uk terrorism laws?

 

 

Probably not but until you have tried and had an official response how do you know? Don't be lazy Nep, remember " The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" 

[BruceVC]

 

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

I was going to, but instead decided to post lewd pictures of women on the internet.

 

 

Oh and how you have excelled in that field !!!

[Zoraptor]

Out of interest, how many of you outraged chaps have bothered to send a single letter to an elected representative on this issue?

My government is actually passing its mass surveillance law at this very time, as some inconvenient, corpulent German and a recalcitrant judge- god bless her- managed to show that our spy agencies had broken the law 80 odd times over the past few years. It won't be mass surveillance, though, because despite having nothing written into the law to prevent it (and given the way other countries  have used their unlimited legislation to target reporters and Iceland with their Al Qaeda volcanoes, Banks and MMOs) the PM- who presided over the 80+ law breakings- has promised it won't happen, much as he promised he wouldn't raise GST and the like, and implemented a strong new oversight policy of him and someone directly appointed by him; having already installed an old school friend as head of the GCSB (=GCHQ, for you) and claiming he barely knew him. And anyone who has looked at the Snowden leaks knows he's flat out lying because New Zealand is listed as using PRISM etc on the slides Awesome Ed leaked. It'll be passed, with the help of two MPs who are only in parliament because the ruling party did not campaign against them.

 

There's literally no point writing anything to any MP about it except Peter Dunne, and he won't change his mind because he wants to be minister again and wants no Nat campaigning against him. He's also got no party... except it got reinstated recently, along with the allowance he gets for it. The Nat MPs will lose their job if they vote against it, the two other MPs will lose their seats if the Nats campaign against them, everyone else is already voting against, every single opinion poll shows it's already opposed by a strong majority, and every expert asked has opposed it so much so that the government has not been able to provide a single local opinion besides its own supporting it. The really ironic thing is that Dunne had his emails and phone records illegally seized when he leaked a report on the GCSB which is why he's no longer a minister, yet is so concerned with saving his own skin and getting the ministerial post back that he'll still vote for it. I guess there's some sort of plus in that it didn't get rushed through as part of the emergency response to 180 odd people dying in an earthquake, as they did last time, but if not using the tragic deaths of your countrymen to pass unrelated legislation with no oversight or submission process in an afternoon because it's unpopular and shonky law is a plus then the democratic barrel bottom has been well and truly scraped, and you're well through the floor below.

 

And all to stop terrism, in a place where the only international terrist act was carried out by the asterisking French Government nearly 30 years ago.

 

A fairly decent summation, from our online equivalent of the Daily Mail of all people, for anyone interested and made it through the diatribe. The whole thing is an utter disgrace and there is completely and absolutely nothing that can be done to stop it, short of praying for a politician to grow a conscience. Well, if you're going to wish might as well make it something truly improbable.

[Walsingham]

OK, so what you're shrieking into the wind is that democracy is pointless?

 

If that's the case, what are you hoping for, exactly?

 

Rule by costumed superheros, hacking government <sic> databases?

[Gfted1]

...and made it through the diatribe.

I made it through, and it was glorious. Seriously.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Rule by costumed superheros, hacking government <sic> databases?

President Dredd? The Hulktator? I suppose Putin could count as a supervillain...