December 3rd, 2013
08:02 AM ET
9 years ago
3-D printer guns at center of House vote to extend screening law
(CNN) - House lawmakers on Tuesday are expected to approve a 10-year extension of a federal law requiring that all guns be detectable by metal screening machines.
But partisan wrangling could still mean the Undetectable Firearms Act will expire next Monday.
FULL STORY
Smith 2
I think they should let it expire.. The presence of this law will not prevent someone from carrying a non-detectable gun into a secure facility.
----------------–
The right wing can make some very stupid arguments. The law doesn't physically stop anyone from doing anything. No law does. But, with the law in place, then at least we can have someone with the legal authority to actually stop someone from entering a secured facility with an undetectable weapon.
Besides, Mr. Smith has completely forgotten about the "enforce the laws we already have on the books" talking point. But seeing how Mr. Smith is apparently in favor of allowing people to enter secured facilities with hidden weapons, what is he really arguing for. We know that the extreme right wing doesn't like government, which is full of "secure facilities."
Yes, and the presence of the law against murder doesn't stop people from murdering; do away with it.
And the presence of the law against robbery doesn't stop people from robbing; do away with it.
And the presence of the law against bribery doesn't stop people from bribing; do away with it.
And the presence of the law against kidnapping doesn't stop people from kidnapping ; do away with it.
etc....
Laws!? We don't need no stinking laws....
But seeing how Mr. Smith is apparently in favor of allowing people to enter secured facilities with hidden weapons, what is he really arguing for. We know that the extreme right wing doesn't like government, which is full of "secure facilities."
______________________
And that in a nutshell is what the Right wants- anarchy.
The communist are here! Arm yourself!
Ol' Yeller
Yes, and the presence of the law against murder doesn't stop people from murdering; do away with it.
And the presence of the law against robbery doesn't stop people from robbing; do away with it.
And the presence of the law against bribery doesn't stop people from bribing; do away with it.
And the presence of the law against kidnapping doesn't stop people from kidnapping ; do away with it.
etc....
Laws!? We don't need no stinking laws....
--
interesting all of your examples target the illegal personal behavior and not the implement used in the crime....
it means you are starting to get a clue. we can only hope!
just saying wrote:
interesting all of your examples target the illegal personal behavior and not the implement used in the crime....
it means you are starting to get a clue. we can only hope!
--------------------
I find it not surprising that you either ignored, or completely missed the point. It's about Republicans not wanting to criminalize "illegal personal behaviors".