How the gun lobby has already blocked Boston’s bombing investigators

Then it shouldn't exist. See, that's what you don't get. If nobody wants it, it shouldn't be forced on us.

Novel concept for you, I realize. Just a freaky thing for a Statist to try to wrap his head around. But there it is.

I'm pretty sure plenty of private businesses don't want all sorts of regulations that make all of us safer for their being in place. Doesn't mean the rest of the country doesn't want them. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be in place, because they'll save lives.

FTFY.

Tamar, the reality is that the gun lobby has both actively blocked any studies into the safety of taggants and by extension any research into improving the safety of taggants.

And if private industry here or overseas thought there was a market for such taggants, they'd already have done studies of their own to market these here and overseas.

Good thing I don't care what an industry that has demonstrated a disregard for human safety in favor of personal profits has to say on the subject. Same reason I don't give a fuck when cigarette companies whine about cigarette taxes. You're anarcho-libertarian BS isn't gonna fly There's a reason for regulations, especially when an industry has failed to step up.

...to the satisfaction of delusional fuckwits with a grain of power who succumb to the delusion that they're everyone elses' parents.

What do you perceive as the risk?

What do YOU perceive as the risk?

I hadn't seen this thread earlier, but I really am shocked. Now, they'll never find out who did it, since the gun lobby blocked the investigation.

Those evil NRA people are the reason that, 20 years from now, the perps will still be running around free, continuing to carry out such attacks. Everyone who defends the 2nd Amendment should be locked up right now!

Sure there is.

All the anti-gun groups could pull their money together and pay for it.

Bloomberg and Jim Carrey all those other Hollywood anti-gun liberals could pay for it.

There is plenty of money out there.......

What do Sudafed, beer, cell phones, puppies, and fishing licenses have in common?

They're all more difficult to buy than a gun.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/5-things-harder-to-buy-than-guns-2013-02-12?dist=beforebell

And of course that is a bullshit lie.

Only a moderately functioning retard like Wordin thinks that murderous Chechen militants would abide by restrictive gun laws.

So often insults are primarily self-revelatory. This is just such an occasion.

Who has trouble buying puppies? I got a puppy guy. You need a puppy? He'll hook you up.

But yeah, speaking as someone who enjoys damaging my liver, Sudafed and alcohol especially have some crazy restrictions in place.

You should write to the Wall Street Journal and tell them they're all liars.

So often insults are primarily self-revelatory. This is just such an occasion.

So good you had to repost it again? At least come up with something original.

#1 Sudafed. Just have to show ID. And they log it.

Buy a gun? Fill out a long form. Have to get a NICS check. In most places have to wait several days to take actual possession of gun. In several other places have to get multiple permits from state/local authorities to own a gun plus a license to buy a gun. Many places also restrict how many guns you can buy. Have to get a license to conceal said weapon which requires fingerprints and a full background check done by the FBI. ​

#2 Booze. In many places have to be 21 to buy.

Buy a gun? While Federal law does have a loophole about those between 18-21 buying a rifle/shotgun or a handgun from a private person the states themselves have their own laws regarding who can and can not buy a gun and at what age. I'd also say that if we can send an 18 old to war with all sorts of guns and other weapons I don't see the objection to letting an 18 old person have a gun. I also don't think you should have to be 21 to buy beer. It should be at 18.​

#3 Wireless contract. Credit check.

If you don't want a credit check for them to sell you a phone at a low price then gouge you over a two year contract then pay FULL PRICE for the phone at the time of purchase. If guns could be bought the same way as cell phones then you would pay $200 for a gun and the gun store would gouge you for a two year contract as well. Cell phone companies want that security deposit because they are afraid of losing money on super expensive phones if you don't get the two year contract or you back out of the contract before it is up.​

#4 Puppies.

Depends on the seller or adoption agency. I got a Shiba Inu a year ago from a local Shiba Inu rescue operation. No paperwork or cash involved. No references. No coming to my house to violate my privacy. I can go to many other places and get a dog or a cat without having to "give my first born" to them. Yes there are some organizations that want details of the potential owner but plenty of ones that don't. This is the dumbest of the 5 things supposedly harder then buying a gun. ​

#5 Hunting or fishing license. Must by Federal law give SSN.

FALSE.

• First no federal or state law compels you to give your SSN to anyone other then the Social Security Administration itself. You can get a Tax ID from the IRS and use that instead of a SSN number. Yes most people just use their SSN.
  
• Second most states ask for it only as one of multiple options to identify yourself. For instance if I want a Florida fishing license I can provide a SSN or a Florida Wildlife customer number or my drivers license. I don't have to give it if I don't want too.
  
• Third licensed gun dealers don't ask you for it. The Federal government asks for it on Form 4473 but it is optional. Most people put it anyway because it makes the process run easier. I put it for all my guns. I don't need the Feds getting me mixed up with some other guy and denying me a purchase because of it.
  
  And why would a gun dealer need my Social Security number anyway? They can't do anything with it. It doesn't provide any information to identify me. It's a useless item for a gun dealer. Gun dealers are going to want my drivers license because it has my picture and my address on it.
  
  Also since social security numbers are easily stolen it's even less of a reliable way to identify someone.

​

So another article of bullshit provided by the master of bullshit: ConfederateFuckingRetardSon

I'm telling you, dude, you should write to the Wall St Journal telling them they're stupid and got it wrong. Maybe they'll even hire you.

Or point out how you're completely wrong and then laugh at you. :libertystatue:

You are also limited to how much Sudafed you can buy within a month and you can only buy a 10-day supply at a time. As an allergy sufferer, it gets really annoying. I can buy a giant thing of Ibuprofen with 500 pills to last me for years, but not Sudafed because I might make ~METH~.

Just tell them, "Look I'm a fat ass. Meth heads are all skin and bones. Do I look like I'm going to be making Meth?"

Oh and Chad I'm just pointing out that it is not as easy to buy a gun as ConfederateFuckingRetardSon and the Wall Street Journal article writer obviously think it is.

Russian separatists were the villains in a shitty Ben Affleck movie.

Ben Affleck is from Boston....

Don't give Black Dove and Midnight Funeral any ideas.

.

You're right. My personal belief is that something like this that can help trace and arrest criminals and prevent future events like the Boston Marathon bombing is a good thing.

Clearly you disagree. That no longer surprises me.