Please explain that crime
Posted By: TTe on 2009-01-20
In Reply to: AMEN. nm - CDW
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Like someone else asked, BB, explain the crime
nm
Then explain his church and minister. Explain that to me. nm
x
Gun ban in UK - crime went up...
nm
I never said that he committed a crime...
nor did I ever say I found him personally offensive. I do not believe that he will make a good president because I disagree with his stance on most of the issues that I find important. I also believe that he made a lot of promises that he can never keep because he does not have that power. Personally, I am not all that into the birth certificate thing because I think he probably is a natural born citizen. I find it hard to believe that he would have made it this far were he not. Why is it okay for people to dislike Bush, but I MUST like Obama?
Of course! O prevents crime
On the other hand, if there had been MORE crime, it would have been blamed on Bush, or possibly Palin.
potentially a crime?
13 firms receiving federal bailout owe back taxes
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press Writer Stephen Ohlemacher, Associated Press Writer – 59 mins ago
States Attorney General Eric Holder, left, shares a moment with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., prior …
WASHINGTON – At least 13 firms receiving billions of dollars in bailout money owe a total of more than $220 million in unpaid federal taxes, a key lawmaker said Thursday.
Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., chairman of a House subcommittee overseeing the federal bailout, said two firms owe more than $100 million apiece.
"This is shameful. It is a disgrace," said Lewis. "We are going to get to the bottom of what is going on here."
The House Ways and Means subcommittee on oversight discovered the unpaid taxes in a review of tax records from 23 of the firms receiving the most money, Lewis said as he opened a hearing on the issue.
The committee said it could not legally release the names of the companies owing taxes. It said one recipient had almost $113 million in unpaid federal income taxes from 2005 and 2006. A second recipient owed almost $102 million dating to before 2004. Another was behind $1.1 million in federal income taxes and $223,000 in federal employment taxes.
"If we looked at all 470 recipients, how much would they owe?" Lewis asked.
Lewis said the panel plans to review tax records from other firms receiving federal money, but he was unsure if it would look at every firm.
"We're not done," he said.
Banks and other firms receiving federal money were required to sign contracts stating they had no unpaid taxes, Lewis said. But he said the Treasury Department did not ask them to turn over their tax records.
Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, told the hearing that if an executive signed a contract knowing that information about unpaid taxes was false, "that would potentially be a crime." He said his office will look to see if crimes were committed.
No one from the Treasury Department appeared at Thursday's hearing. Lewis said he asked Treasury officials for a private briefing on their efforts to uncover unpaid taxes, as well as someone to testify at Thursday's hearing.
"They said no one was available," Lewis said in an interview.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is already under fire on Capitol Hill for not preventing $165 million in bonuses from being paid to employees at troubled insurance giant AIG.
People will ask, said Rep. Artur Davis, D-Ala., why there are "large companies getting taxpayer dollars, making false representations, and we can't even name them, much less make them pay the money back, much less prosecute them."
Davis continued: "Will they get their day on a billboard, hopefully?"
"Absolutely," said Barofsky. If someone lied, he said, "They need to be prosecuted."
The revelation is sure to spark outrage on Capitol Hill, where the House is expected to vote Thursday on a bill that would impose steep taxes on employee bonuses at AIG and other firms that have received bailout money.
To date, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, has paid out more than $300 billion to private companies, with billions more on the way.
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time!
x
But it's never a hate crime....
....when a black person attacks a white person? Believe me, there are people of every race who hate one race or another for some stupid reason. Don't quote me on this but I think the Chinese are embarrassed and angered if mistaken for Koreans.
We are all God's people. It's a shame.
Obama will be a one termer, not because of an assassination, because in under six months he's managed to anger many folks including the Jews and gays. Broken promises and lies. People believed he would pay their mortgages and gas. Unbelievable. Obama voters are getting their wakeup call. Wow. Even I thought it would take longer than this.
Guess Who's Soft on Crime...sm
Guess Who's Soft on Crime
Our system of “justice” has descended so far into routine thuggishness that even the blogosphere seems to have let this horror pass unnoticed. Sure, it’s only Texas, but still …
A crooked cop named Tom Coleman was hired in 1998 to conduct a drug investigation in Tulia, Texas, which he did by inventing evidence against 39 innocent men and women, almost all black. Most of the victims were jailed on the sole basis of Coleman’s lies, for terms ranging up to 90 years. When this vicious scheme finally fell apart, the governor pardoned 33 of Coleman’s victims, who won a settlement of $6 million. The badge-carrying perp was tried and convicted for perjury, a crime carrying a maximum sentence of ten years in Texas. A judge called him “the most devious, nonresponsive law enforcement witness this court has witnessed in 25 years on the bench in Texas.” Which, in Texas, we may presume is going some.
So a jury of twelve good men and true — none of them black — found this vicious, corrupt rogue cop guilty of what one judge had called “blatant perjury.” And the jurors threw the book at him, recommending seven whole years on probation. This sounded about right to the trial judge, who is expected to slap Coleman’s wrist really, really hard at the sentencing Tuesday.
She's committing a federal crime
Nofify the Federal Marshalls and they'll bust her. I lived down the street from a girl doing that and she went to federal prison!
Rigging Elections is a Crime
The McCain/Palin GOP is already in the process of stealing the Ohio vote, as was done in 2004. Among those at the center of the GOP strategy is Bush Family computer operative Michael Connell, who programmed the key vote counting mechanisms that were used to give George W. Bush his second term.
ttp://www.truthout.org/article/ten-ways-gop-is-now-stealing-ohio-vote
You see crime being a result of economy, but I see
Oh well don't you know it's not a hate crime when it's against a woman
Only race, religion, etc. No, not a hate crime when it's against a woman... unbelievably, but that's the country we live in. And it's the same reason everything went down the way it did in the primaries, and now in this election.
Do you also blame victims of crime and
inciting the crimes perpetrated against them. Yours is truly an ignorant, ignorant statement.
OMG. Fine...go look at the crime statistics.
nm
Oh, c'mon... the low crime was not only related to - s/msg
the HUGE police/secret service presence that was obviously there, but mainly to the mood. It's the first good news that everyday people in the US have had in a long, long time. It was just one day out of many, where people enjoyed the moment, the hope, the inauguration itself, the promise of the new administration, and a feel-good moment. We all know the glow won't last forever, but why not bask in it and enjoy a great moment in history. Even if you voted for the other candidate, you still have to admit that it was a truly great day for African Americans and ALL Americans to see democracy work right for a change, instead of being fixed and rigged. It was truly a magical day that many in this country, Repub or Dem, will remember for a lifetime.
Why did the Kennedy's have ties to organized crime?
Why was the Texas Democratic party of Lyndon Johnson horribly corrupt?
Why was Lyndon Johnson's election to the senate in 1948 won by massive voter fraud?
Why did Lyndon Johnson insert language into the IRS code in 1954 that prohibited non-profits, including churches, from endorsing or opposing candidates for political office. In effect, this thoroughly corrupt man used the power of the IRS to silence his opposition. Unfortunately, it worked. Why? His disservice to religious freedom has yet to be undone. Why?
How did Kennedy defeat Nixon in Illinois?
Just rhetorical questions.
Yes, you skirted the issue. He DID commit a crime.
Yep, we agree to disgree. Him lying under oath was totally on HIM, and THAT is the real issue. He could have told the truth at any time and avoided the impeachment hearings and the whole thing. He could have taken the wind out of any investigation, if he had just told the truth. It would have gone away. If sex with a 21-year-old girl in the White House where he and his wife and daughter lived was no big deal, why did he just not own up to it? Because he is a coward and morally bankrupt would be my guess. For whatever reason, he chose not to. No one twisted his arm behind his back and made him perjure himself. He did that all by his lonesome. While I find what he did with Monica Lewinsky tasteless at a minimum, and stupid at a maximum, that is not the most objectionable thing I find about him. The fact that he committed a felony, something you or I would go to jail for and there are people in jail for today...sorry, you defend him if you like, and continue to give him a pass. That is the part of the value system, his and his party's, that baffles me.
Dual citizenship is not a crime. It's a privilege.
Repeat one GOOD reason?
Agreed. It's abuse of power AND a crime
nm
Did everyone see the post below about the UK's gun ban and crime rate rising? sm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm
Use of gun-related crime increased 40% during the gun ban and smuggling of guns was rampant, along with people turning every possible object into a gun. Not the answer obviously.
those boys were not charged with a racist crime -
they were charged with burglary, disorderly conduct, and theft.
According to what I read, they cannot be charged with a hate crime because Obama is a political figure and therefore it would be considered a "free speech" issue and not a hate crime. If he were an everyday citizen, then he could be charged with a hate crime.
Either way, for Palin and Obama, it was repulsive to me!
I must be misreading the Hate Crime Bill
Nothing I've read says that any of the things that are crimes now (such as pedophilia) will be considered any less of a crime...pedophilia is still an arrestable offense. My interpretation of what I've read is that the only thing this bill does is expand the group of people who it is okay to assault/kill simply based on their lifestyle changes. In other words, you can't kill someone just because they're gay, Buddhist, Belgian, short, or ugly. It doesn't decriminalize any behavior to my reading. That concept seems to be a figment of somebody's imagination, and much like the game of telephone we played as small children, the actual facts of the bill have gotten more twisted with each telling.
A hate crime occurs at least once every hour in the
Wasn't this predicted recently?
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gvUetkOxJwgY0GbCxg1_f75A1CqA
It's not a crime to state your religious views in public.
We don't have to keep it in our homes or our churches. Freedom of religion covers that too!
I can't bring myself to conclude that Bush had a hand in the crime...sm
I think his office new an attack was coming and did not inform the public.
There are also some very interesting findings such as the insurance policy taken out on the WTC with a terrorism provision only a few weeks before the attack. There were other actions that were taken by our government in the months preceeding the attacks that do not add up to it being a surprise attack.
We'll discuss that crime when Bush et al are done with their trial.
nm
New Mexico, Arizona Declare Border Emergencies to Fight Crime
What a shame that these two governors had to declare states of emergency simply because we have at president who knows that this problem exists but just doesn’t care enough about preventing another 9/11 to do anything about it.
From: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=akXph_LySDzs&refer=latin_america#
New Mexico, Arizona Declare Border Emergencies to Fight Crime
Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- New Mexico and Arizona governors declared states of emergency for their borders with Mexico, pledging to increase funding to stop the rise in drug smuggling and violence by illegal immigrants.
New Mexico's Bill Richardson and Arizona's Janet Napolitano blamed a lack of money from the federal government that has left the borders and their residents unprotected by U.S. patrols.
``Governor Richardson was asked to take this action by local law enforcement and ranch families.'' Billy Sparks, Richardson's chief of staff, said in a phone interview today.
The declarations were made Friday by Richardson, 47, and yesterday by Napolitano, 47. Richardson, who has been named a possible 2008 presidential candidate, said in a press release there has been ``total inaction and lack of resources from the federal government.''
The escalation in violence during the past month, including gunshots fired at Columbus, New Mexico, police chief Clare May, the attempted kidnapping of three girls and the deaths of 100 cattle along New Mexico's 180-mile border with Mexico prompted Richardson to declare the emergency, Sparks said.
The declaration makes $750,000 of state funding available in affected counties. Richardson pledged to make an additional $1 million available. The money will be used to increase local law enforcement, open a new homeland security office in the border region and help build a fence to protect livestock near Columbus.
Fences, Neighbors
Unlike some border areas in the U.S., landowners in New Mexico maintain their own fences to keep illegal immigrants off their property. In one case a landowner's entire fence was stolen, Sparks said. The U.S. Border Patrol has 109 workers for 200 miles from El Paso, Texas, across New Mexico to Arizona, said Sparks. That is expected to increase by 75 in October.
Napolitano's order makes $1.5 million available to fight crime along the border, according to her press release.
``I intend to take every action feasible to stem the tide of criminal behavior on the Arizona side of the border,'' she said.
The number of unauthorized immigrants entering the U.S. each year rose to more than 700,000 in 2004 from 140,000 in the 1980s, according to the Arizona declaration.
Questions about the security of the U.S. border with Mexico have risen since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks as officials have tried to limit movement into the U.S. of potential terrorists along with the illegal immigrants and drug smugglers. Immigration restrictions have forced more illegal crossings over landowner- built fences in Arizona and New Mexico.
The border emergency declarations were reported earlier today by the New York Times.
Numbers Jump
So far in the fiscal year that began in October, agents in the Yuma, Arizona, sector of the U.S. border patrol have captured 122,344 illegal immigrants, said Michael Gramley, spokesman for the sector. The previous record was 108,000 in 2000. The Yuma sector covers 126 miles of border in Arizona and California.
``We're taking greater strides toward reaching a higher level of border security,'' said Gramley, in a phone interview. ``The border patrol values any assistance that we receive from state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies.''
Federal officials said they have been making progress in increasing border security.
``Extraordinary progress has been made over the last couple of years as far as strengthening our borders,'' said Jarrod Agen, spokesman for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. He declined to comment on the state of emergency in Arizona and New Mexico. ``It's the authority of the governors there.''
Both governors called on authorities in Mexico to increase security on their sides of the border, the press releases said.
Mexico's Response
Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement yesterday that it had agreed after meeting with Napolitano to support her actions and work to reduce crime on its side of the border. The ministry blamed organized crime for the border problems.
``On that side and on this side there's organized crime,'' Mexican President Vicente Fox said in an interview with reporters during a visit to the northern border state of Sonora yesterday. ``On that side and this side there's drug consumption. The question is how do all the drugs that cross over there reach the consumer markets? What's being done on that side?''
Texas Governor Rick Perry, 55 doesn't plan to declare an emergency because he believes protecting the U.S. border is the federal government's responsibility, said Robert Black, Perry's spokesman, in a phone interview. Texas's 1,200-mile border with Mexico is the longest of any U.S. state with a foreign country.
``The governor had said that you can't have homeland security without the federal government,'' said Black. ``The feds can't avoid their responsibility to the states.'' To contact the reporter on this story:
Darrell Preston in Dallas at dpreston@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: August 17, 2005 14:52 EDT
Obama is letting them drop charges against terrorists for this horrible sick crime???
What orifice did you pull this out of?
*Compassionate Conservative* Bill Bennett: Abort every black baby, reduce crime.
William Bennett Defends Comment on Abortion and Crime
'Book of Virtues' Author Says Hypothetical Remark Was Valid
By JAKE TAPPER
- After pondering on his radio program how aborting every black infant in America would affect crime rates, best-selling author and self-styled Values Czar Bill Bennett is vehemently denying he is a racist and defending his willingness to speak publicly about race and crime.
On the Wednesday edition of his radio show, Bill Bennett's Morning in America, syndicated by Salem Radio Network, a caller raised the theory that Social Security is in danger of becoming insolvent because legalized abortion has reduced the number of tax-paying citizens. Bennett said economic arguments should never be employed in discussions of moral issues.
If it were your sole purpose to reduce crime, Bennett said, You could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down.
That would be an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down, he added.
Outrage From Democrats
Bennett was secretary of education for President Ronald Reagan and is considered one of the Republican Party's big brains. But this week Democrats and some Republicans seemed to also question if Bennett's mouth is of size as well.
Democrats expressed outrage, ranging from demands for an apology to requests that the Federal Communications Commission suspend Bennett's show.
Republicans, Democrats and all Americans of good will should denounce this statement, should distance themselves from Mr. Bennett, said Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., D-Ill. And the private sector should not support Mr. Bennett's radio show or his comments on the air.
I'm not even going to comment on something that disgusting, said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. Really, I'm thinking of my black grandchild and I'm going to hold (off).
'Things That People Are Thinking'
In an interview with ABC News, Bennett said that anyone who knows him knows he isn't racist. He said he was merely extrapolating from the best-selling book Freakonomics, which posits the hypothesis that falling crimes rates are related to increased abortion rates decades ago. It would have worked for, you know, single-parent moms; it would have worked for male babies, black babies, Bennett said. So why immediately bring up race when discussing crime rates? There was a lot of discussion about race and crime in New Orleans, Bennett said. There was discussion – a lot of it wrong – but nevertheless, media jumping on stories about looting and shooting and gangs and roving gangs and so on.
There's no question this is on our minds, Bennett said. What I do on our show is talk about things that people are thinking … we don't hesitate to talk about things that are touchy.
Bennett said, I'm sorry if people are hurt, I really am. But we can't say this is an area of American life (and) public policy that we're not allowed to talk about – race and crime.
Robert George, an African-American, Republican editorial writer for the New York Post, agrees that Bennett's comments were not meant as racist. But he worries they feed into stereotypes of Republicans as insensitive. His overall point about not making broad sociological claims and so forth, that was a legitimate point, George said. But it seems to me someone with Bennett's intelligence … should know better the impact of his words and sort of thinking these things through before he speaks.
The blunt-spoken Bennett has ruffled feathers before, most recently in 2003 for revelations that despite his best-selling books about virtue and values, he is a high-rolling preferred customer at Las Vegas and Atlantic City casinos.
In light of accusations that the Bush administration should have been more sensitive to black victims of Hurricane Katrina, a Republican official told ABC News that Bennett's comments were probably as poorly timed as they were politically incorrect.
ABC News' Avery Miller, Karen Travers and Toni L. Wilson contributed to this report.
Please explain to me what we are not
doing to protect ourselves here? You just assume there's nothing in place here to protect us because you believe all the unsubstantiated liberal talking points that come out ever day. Believe it or not part of protecting us here at home is making the world a more stable place. We can't just hope they won't make the long journey over here like they did in the 1700 and 1800s. Today, in just a few short hours they can walk off of any commercial airline or private plane. We are in Iraq for a myriad of reasons including protecting our own boarders. Why does this have to be explained over and over again to you? A lot of liberals call conservatives narrow minded, but many of you have tunnel vision to a degree I've never seen before.
Let me explain how I can say that.
I agree with you that there were inciting posts from both political viewpoints on the conservative board, myself included. However, I think what is being pointed out was a general trend of "anything goes" for the conservative posters and high deletion/banning rates for the liberals. This has been apparent for a long time and complained about many, many times (usually complaints are deleted so they are virtually impossible to document at this point). I personally was warned once for "picking on" Nan, when objectively, it really was more the other way around. There is a sickness of spirit on the conservative board at times. I was drawn into this and became "ill" also at times. I am not proud of this.
As far as the moderator or administrator, she did post in the Christian board some time ago regarding her beliefs. They were evangelical Christian, kind of extreme. That, coupled with occasional comments on the political board in addition to deleting LOTS of liberal posts and actively supporting and not reigning in the Conservatives is, well, just common sense as to her political leanings.
Explain please
I don't have ESP...
So please explain this:
If marriage is for procreation, and Mary and Joseph were married, why and how was Mary still supposedly a VIRGIN when Jesus was born?
Well, then perhaps you could explain to me
why Saddam's atrocities didn't seem to bother us in the 80s when we wanted his help against Iran?
This might help explain why.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/washington/07recruit.html?ex=1309924800&en=1be0e7d4e2aac8d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
7, 2006
Hate Groups Are Infiltrating the Military, Group Asserts
A decade after the Pentagon declared a zero-tolerance policy for racist hate groups, recruiting shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq have allowed large numbers of neo-Nazis and skinhead extremists to infiltrate the military, according to a watchdog organization.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks racist and right-wing militia groups, estimated that the numbers could run into the thousands, citing interviews with Defense Department investigators and reports and postings on racist Web sites and magazines.
We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad, the group quoted a Defense Department investigator as saying in a report to be posted today on its Web site, www.splcenter.org. That's a problem.
A Defense Department spokeswoman said officials there could not comment on the report because they had not yet seen it.
The center called on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to appoint a task force to study the problem, declare a new zero tolerance policy and strictly enforce it.
The report said that neo-Nazi groups like the National Alliance, whose founder, William Pierce, wrote The Turner Diaries, the novel that was the inspiration and blueprint for Timothy J. McVeigh's bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, sought to enroll followers in the Army to get training for a race war.
The groups are being abetted, the report said, by pressure on recruiters, particularly for the Army, to meet quotas that are more difficult to reach because of the growing unpopularity of the war in Iraq.
The report quotes Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, saying, Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces, and commanders don't remove them from the military even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members.
Mr. Barfield said Army recruiters struggled last year to meet goals. They don't want to make a big deal again about neo-Nazis in the military, he said, because then parents who are already worried about their kids signing up and dying in Iraq are going to be even more reluctant about their kids enlisting if they feel they'll be exposed to gangs and white supremacists.
The 1996 crackdown on extremists came after revelations that Mr. McVeigh had espoused far-right ideas when he was in the Army and recruited two fellow soldiers to aid his bomb plot. Those revelations were followed by a furor that developed when three white paratroopers were convicted of the random slaying of a black couple in order to win tattoos and 19 others were discharged for participating in neo-Nazi activities.
The defense secretary at the time, William Perry, said the rules were meant to leave no room for racist and extremist activities within the military. But the report said Mr. Barfield, who is based at Fort Lewis, Wash., had said that he had provided evidence on 320 extremists there in the past year, but that only two had been discharged. He also said there was an online network of neo-Nazis.
They're communicating with each other about weapons, about recruiting, about keeping their identities secret, about organizing within the military, he said. Several of these individuals have since been deployed to combat missions in Iraq.
The report cited accounts by neo-Nazis of their infiltration of the military, including a discussion on the white supremacist Web site Stormfront. There are others among you in the forces, one participant wrote. You are never alone.
An article in the National Alliance magazine Resistance urged skinheads to join the Army and insist on being assigned to light infantry units.
The Southern Poverty Law Center identified the author as Steven Barry, who it said was a former Special Forces officer who was the alliance's military unit coordinator.
Light infantry is your branch of choice because the coming race war and the ethnic cleansing to follow will be very much an infantryman's war, he wrote. It will be house-to-house, neighborhood-by-neighborhood until your town or city is cleared and the alien races are driven into the countryside where they can be hunted down and 'cleansed.'
He concluded: As a professional soldier, my goal is to fill the ranks of the United States Army with skinheads. As street brawlers, you will be useless in the coming race war. As trained infantrymen, you will join the ranks of the Aryan warrior brotherhood.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Like I said....we all only have to explain our
own decisions to God. Remember your argument here to me. It may come in handy.
God bless.
Someone explain this to me...
If you are a suspected terrorist or suspected terrorist sympathizer you can go to Gitmo or sent out of the country to a place where torture is A-OK for the rest of your life w/o being given a reason for the incarceration or access to our legal system, even if you are an American citizen but....if you are on a list of terror suspects, you can buy a gun just like everyone else.
Published on Saturday, May 5, 2007 by Associated Press
NRA: Don’t Ban Gun Sales to Suspected Terrorists
by Sam Hananel
WASHINGTON - The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms. Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.
In a letter this week to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said the bill, offered last week by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., “would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere ’suspicions’ of a terrorist threat.” 0506 07
“As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word ’suspect’ has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties,” Cox wrote.
In a letter supporting the measure, Acting Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling said the bill would not automatically prevent a gun sale to a suspected terrorist. In some cases, federal agents may want to let a sale go forward to avoid compromising an ongoing investigation.
Hertling also notes there is a process to challenge denial of a sale.
Current law requires gun dealers to conduct a criminal background check and deny sales if a gun purchaser falls under a specified prohibition, including a felony conviction, domestic abuse conviction or illegal immigration. There is no legal basis to deny a sale if a purchaser is on a terror watch list.
“When I tell people that you can be on a terrorist watch list and still be allowed to buy as many guns as you want, they are shocked,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports Lautenberg’s bill.
In the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, lawmakers are considering a number of measures to strengthen gun sale laws. The NRA, which usually opposes increased restrictions on firearms, is taking different positions depending on the proposal.
“Right now law enforcement carefully monitors all firearms sales to those on the terror watch list,” said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. “Injecting the attorney general into the process just politicizes it.”
A 2005 study by the Government Accountability Office found that 35 of 44 firearm purchase attempts over a five-month period made by known or suspected terrorists were approved by the federal law enforcement officials.
© 2007 The Associated Press.
Will someone please explain to me -
Why do you keep saying our vote does not count and that the next President has already been chosen?
I for one, have too much to do, to try to explain it....sm
to you, because frankly, I'm getting so I don't care.
There's nothing to find out, and they're making stuff up, so until you have something substantial, I have work to do.
However, if you would have posted about the screaming witch woman from up north and her rag on her, I would have really busted a gut being upset.
As it is, I'm just letting it all go, because Gov. Palin is better than you, better than me, and better than the media.
She will rise above it all, and come out on top. Of this, I have no doubts whatsoever.
That's all I have to say on the matter, cuz I have too much to type for more here....
Look at who you are trying to explain this to
xx
Please explain...
Please explain exactly how Democratic voters are misled. How are they being misled??? What, can they not read the English on the voter card? All I know is Ohio had 200,000 dead and nonexistant voters voting for Obama. I don't think it's the Democratic voters who are being misled, I think it's the American people, who don't realize what a complete scam is going on with this ACORN group.
Would someone please explain
How McCain can "guarantee" he's going to win as he said on Meet The Press yesterday?
Perhaps this will help explain....
Remember him talking about the tax "credits?" That is his way of floating giving tax rebates to people who pay no taxes. This is the opinion from someone on the other side of the pond...and explains it pretty well.
OBAMA TAX PLAN – 95% BULL?
Obama’s tax plan is receiving much praise from some elements of the Tory blogosphere. Promising tax cuts for everything and everyone is certainly a very attractive position, and I can see why so many ObamaCons are attracted to it; but does the claim really stand up to scrutiny?
Firstly, if you look at Obama’s promise of tax cuts for 95% of Americans and then look at the billions of dollars needed for the government programs that he has pledged to implement or expand, and common sense should tell you that thing simply do not add up.
Secondly, the 95% of all Americans figure is suspect. Since more than 30% of working Americans don't pay any income taxes now - many in fact get a welfare check - how can they get a "tax cut?" So how does Obama back up this 95% claim? Well those of you with long memories may remember Bill Clinton’s battle to change the definition of what “is” is? What we are witnessing here is an attempt to change the definition of tax cut. To me, and I am guessing to most people, a tax cut means you get to keep more of what you earn. But for the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts disguised by the infamous "tax credit." All but one of these tax credits would be "refundable," which is Washington-speak for an income transfer -- a government check -- from taxpayers to non taxpayers. In other words, increased welfare, a Demogrant if you will. Obama's marketing genius is to call this increase in welfare a tax cut; and given how UK conservatives have watched the collapse into failure of Gordon Browns tax credit system, I am mystified why they would support Obama’s.
That being said...he says it expands welfare. I say it is socialist. Same end result. Marxist redistribution of wealth. But it is working...LOL. He is sure hiding it from YOU.
Let's see if I can explain this to you..
most blacks voted for Obama; most are against gay marriage, as their vote points out. How hard is that for you to comprehend? The black vote FOR Obama hurt the gay marriage vote. Is that simpler for you to understand?
I really tried to explain to you......... sm
in my other response to you above that I don't hate you and that I don't hate gay people or teach my sons to hate them. I don't know in exactly what way you think I should reach out to gay people. I do know some gay people, and as much as I may like them as a person, I would have to tell them if they presented the subject my feelings on it and why.
Please explain....(sm)
why you think it would be *trickle-up poverty* and how that works. I can't wait to hear this one...LOL.
explain to me
all their "tax breaks" then
because maybe im missing the bigger picture.
the middle class... (ME included) got a tax break... my first one EVER... so until I see a better one under Obama's administration, I'll stick with what I believe is a tax break for everyone that pays taxes...
and how is it a fact that the "rich" pays what, like 80% of the taxes?
That would explain why
why a clear 7.2% margin of victory mandate was handed over on Nov 4, why seas of humanity were jumping for joy that night, why DC is filling up to the rafters as Jan 20 approaches and why the rest of the world is joining in our single-digit T-minus-9 countdown. The transition is coming off without a hitch despite your best efforts to protest otherwise, the guy has assembled a blue-ribbon team, has plans in place and is ready to roll. Like I said, you are not handling defeat very well and cannot stand to see REAL leadership emerge after W's scorched earth administration.
Please explain this one........ sm
"*..., even a black man.....*
That's right....even a black man. Is it so hard for you to fathom the idea that someone of a different skin color would be of equal standing to you? Do you just completely reject the ideas of civility and equality? Has it ever occurred to you that this *black man* has every intention of trying to help YOU keep your job and help you keep food on your table?"
Why is it that this inauguration is being tauted, especially by the Democrats, as "an historical event" in which the first African-American man will become POTUS and that is supposedly politically correct, but when a Republican or non-Obama supporter dares utter that he is a black man, they are jumped on like white on rice for being racist and bigoted?
Please explain.....nm
x
|
