|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 6, 2015 20:08:38 GMT -6
R shaw your going to,get told you have no,idea on how the vetting process works and that everything on that end is no problem it is all those with a visa that overstays their time.............
Neither should be allowed.
And no not the end of the world, but t adds cost and added risk to the people here who are US citizens a fact no one can deny, we can debate how big the risk but it is increased due to the poor process, even though we are told it is tight and solid...............
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 6, 2015 23:09:04 GMT -6
I am not going to get into a peeing match regarding vetting as some here feel they know the whole process very well and if I need information I can just ask. What I would like to ask is under which administration over the last say 7 starting with Carter which had the best immigration policy and vetting policy and why and how? The implication to me is that this is all a recent, very recent issue and I am asking those in the know who did it better and when? Also the continued attacks on government and the unpopular topics such as immigration we have now created an environment where by executive order is the only way action will be taken. The Congress won't risk election over this and thus have determined to be non players and whiners. Our own Paul Ryan stated his first day in leadership of the house that no immigration bill action until after the 2016 elections. He certainly is not the only one wanting this but it sure shows the true colors of even our Conservative members of the house. Being a patriot has to be conditional based on polls, elections and other factors. Several of us who fought in very unpopular wars did not listen to polls, but chose to serve regardless of the cost.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by PamIsMe on Dec 7, 2015 2:41:28 GMT -6
So, basically we should never let anyone into our country unless they are Caucasian and Christians, because they never are mass murderers?
Maybe we should just do like Trump says, kill their families and get their wives to tell on them. No doubt because their wives are rich independent women like his wife is.
I have 3 grandsons soon to be 7 9 and 15. You may want you sons and grandsons to be in a ground war in the middle east but I sure don't! Iraq and Afghanistan have gone on for years and years, if we start a ground war now no doubt it will still be going on by the time they are old enough to serve. There may not be a draft again, but some young men seem to be enamored of going into the fray. I think they should let the old guys who are so intent on another war go and serve instead.
We are now confusing two separate issues, mass shootings in the US and the problem of ISIS. There is just no easy solution to the mass murders in our country and with all the hate spewed against organizations and people and all the publicity they get, it won't stop any time soon. If the middle east wants to get rid of ISIS, then let them fight it out.
Pam
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 7, 2015 6:47:55 GMT -6
Pam come on, if people want into our country they can do it in the fashion of becoming an American citizen. We do not need to be taking in Syrian refugees unless we have a better system in place, again not me staying such the head of the FBI and other high ranking Intel people are telling us the system In place is not great.
They should be moved to some where in the Middle East. Not here until they can get a better system in place. The idea of what their belief system is in many ways go against us as free Americans that is just a fact.
If the Middle East wants to get rid of Isis let them fight it out? What?
They are committing and have committed acts of terrorism against our people and our allies outside of the Middle East. we cannot burry our heads in the sand or you and I won't have to worry about our kids or grandkids going to war they could end up dying here on US soil in another act of terrorism.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 7, 2015 9:02:05 GMT -6
whats not so?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 7, 2015 20:15:40 GMT -6
Than what is not so? The fact that the security clearance for Syrians is null and void, we can call no one to find out about their past history of criminal activity because we have no dialog with the Syrian govt so we do not know if someone has a criminal record or not from there.
Our relationship with Syria has never been great and has gone down hill in the last few years by a lot. So this talk of an extensive vetting process is bogus plain and simple, we can interview and re interview some of these people and finding out facts from their home country not at all easy. We are intrusting in the UN for the first stage of this so called process. Then they go to the FBI which we already know his thoughts on the entire process, and homelands security and national,counter terrorism center.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 8, 2015 7:02:57 GMT -6
my question was to RShaw-
you, TC, don't have a clue on how the process works, and don't even know the difference between visas, and refugees
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 8, 2015 7:04:45 GMT -6
Ok................
Tell me exactly how it all works then and everyone else, that way I and others can be informed.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 8, 2015 7:06:40 GMT -6
reread this thread
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 8, 2015 7:09:57 GMT -6
Sorry never found the exact vetting process would you please explain again.
Ok I did find your copy and paste and the remark that short of swimming the Atlantic no tougher process than the vetting of Syrian refugees LOL.
Seems the head of the FBI does not agree with your source, as his dept is responsible in part for some of that process, easier to get information from regions we have a dialog with and information sharing, sorry we do not have that with Syria.
Funny how we want tougher controls on guns of our own people who have tons and tons of more a reliable information than these Syrians yet the vetting process is far tighter than a background check for the purchase of a gun by an American citizen where a lot of information is on file.
Having information and sharing of such is the problem on both accounts, we get far more from states than we do the Syrian govt would you not agree?
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 8, 2015 14:33:53 GMT -6
Vetting of our immigrants may not be such a big issue if we had more oversight on the purchase of firearms and or other weapons. There will sure to be persons trying to enter that have colored pasts and or motives for the future and that has been true since the Mayflower. I am just guessing or betting that we have several times more citizens and current non Syrian residents with more mental imbalance or political agendas already living here and armed than those who want to arrive even if everyone was a known terrorist.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 8, 2015 20:18:03 GMT -6
Bryce more control of guns? You can't be serious? You think the criminal elements are buying these guns from bass pro, Cabela's or a smaller store front? The vast majority are not and with the shear numbers of guns in the US the market would not dry up for many,many years .
Why do some look to penalize the innocent because a criminal did something bad? We should hold more accountable those that did the crime and not punish the avg American over such, that is what the constiution is all about, the 2nd a,end ent protects our rights to keep and bear arms, not if the govt wants us to, but merely because we are law abiding citizens and have that protected right as law abiding citizens.
Vetting of potential terrorist is not about gun control at all, much of this is done without guns and the mass casualties come from other fronts, look at the bombings, suicide bombings, 9/11 all pulled off with little to no gun fire involved. They do not need guns to carry out their mission, the Boston marathon was done with out guns.
Terrorism is far deeper than a few rifles with extended magazines far more destruction done with other means and that is what they are about far more than handguns and rifles.
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 8, 2015 20:38:40 GMT -6
You helped me out here. We have criminals that are citizens stockpiling weapons and that is less of an issue to you than ne immigrants? I love the rhetoric about enforcing the laws we have and most that taut this want less government and fewer government employees. Who is going to do the enforcement work? Maybe we could enlist our national guard to police each house to find the criminals with weapons. I am sure the conservatives would rally flock for that procedure.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 10, 2015 7:55:02 GMT -6
TC- do you believe in ANY laws?
for example- speed laws?
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 10, 2015 19:09:46 GMT -6
Bryce not helped you at all, we have criminals stock oiling weapons? Anyone with a felony will not be getting them from a licensed FFL dealer, having a felony and guns gets you a trip back to jail. They are buying from private sales or stealing even far more common these days than purchasing guns form private people.
Gun Theft is up big time in the last 10 or so years.
Tman I believe in laws, those that work and deter crime, not reactionary laws or feel good laws. Much of what the rhetoric on gun control is about are newly found feel good laws. Sorry just the facts. We can debate any knew law the dems have talked about in the last 3-5 years anytime and how they will cut into the criminal element and so a positive impact.
We just had 3 guys arrested in Michigan for having a ton of cell phones, being held on terrorist charges, and more here in Missouri 2-3 guys going into 2 wal marts and buying 100 cell phones, this worries me a lot more than making changes to gun laws. Far more damage to be had from the phone element than the gun element.
Wonder how many Liberials talking about he cell,phone deals versus the guns?
Federal laws on cell phone purchases comming soon you think?
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 10, 2015 19:48:09 GMT -6
So there goes your enforce more of the laws we already have argument. Now you are agreeing that our current system is inadequate and offer no real change either. Just more of the same and arm yourself. Now the protection of our society is the job of individuals as they see fit instead of working on community and untied ways to protect our citizens. I can do my part but I also support stronger public involvement.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 11, 2015 6:07:20 GMT -6
Bryce I am a realist and your not going to do much for crime if criminals want to be well, criminals. Freedom of choice unless your stripping thst way our prisons will be over run and past max capacity. If you want to deter crime people need to be more aware and have a decent system in place, people who,own guns can expect a wood gun cabinet or a 90.00 model from wal Mary as asiwaute for their firearms. Spend a few 100 on a safe that will keep out the highest majority of criminals, invest in a security system and keep all serial number so guns some place not easy to get at.
To think any new talk that the dems have been pushing will do anything for crime is laughable at best and in the end will only effect the law abiding gun owners no one else. That is just a fact. Again look at the areas with the most severe gun laws and the crime rates, all of those added laws have done little to nothing in effect on crime nothing, except make those who follow the laws jump thru more hoops to enjoy their firearms.
If the Feds really want to do something give people who buy a certain grade of gun safe or vault a tax credit. Like they have done for high efficientcy Windows, applicances and furnaces and air conditioners. Make it much harder and more time consuming for those criminals to steal firearms.
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Dec 11, 2015 6:49:05 GMT -6
Tman I believe in laws, those that work and deter crime
tell me specific laws that do such
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Dec 11, 2015 8:49:43 GMT -6
What responsibilities do societies have in working to curb the thought process of "wanting to become a criminal". If you feel that laws do little to no good and don't want more government funding or public employment and or any more control on human liberties that means we need to find ways to foster a society that leads to less desire to become part of the criminal element.
Bryce
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Dec 11, 2015 9:16:31 GMT -6
Bryce what your then looking for is what we call panacea never going to happen.
Do you man you can look up in your own state or others what laws work and which ones do not ,clearly seen by the statistics on crime and crime prevention
|
|