Jump to content
ATX Community

Affordable Care Act


Christian

Recommended Posts

Guest Taxed

Why should we have background checks when criminals already have guns?

Why do we have driver license requirements? A lot of people drive without license or suspended license?

Criminals obtained their guns illegally and when caught they MUST be prosecuted to the full extent of law. Also if there is proof that a gun was sold in violation of background checks the seller must be held responsible!

It is not liberal propoganda. They have it on video people selling guns from the back of pickup truck at a gun show to anyone with cash!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do we have driver license requirements? A lot of people drive without license or suspended license?

Criminals obtained their guns illegally and when caught they MUST be prosecuted to the full extent of law. Also if there is proof that a gun was sold in violation of background checks the seller must be held responsible!

It is not liberal propoganda. They have it on video people selling guns from the back of pickup truck at a gun show to anyone with cash!

It is not illegal for one person to sell another person a firearm. Whether they are in the parking lot of the gun show, or the driveway of the seller of the parking lot of Wal-Mart. No laws are broken.

The law requires gun dealers to perform background checks on all buyers. This is also in place when the dealers sell at a gun show.

Still looking for that "Gun Show Loophole"..... All you have given me is liberal drivel hyperbole and propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do we have driver license requirements? A lot of people drive without license or suspended license?

Criminals obtained their guns illegally and when caught they MUST be prosecuted to the full extent of law. Also if there is proof that a gun was sold in violation of background checks the seller must be held responsible!

It is not liberal propoganda. They have it on video people selling guns from the back of pickup truck at a gun show to anyone with cash!

So, lets increase the testing and make background checks required to obtain a drivers license? Your statement SUPPORTS my position!!

People who choose to break the law, do not care what the law(s) say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taxed

It is not illegal for one person to sell another person a firearm. Whether they are in the parking lot of the gun show, or the driveway of the seller of the parking lot of Wal-Mart. No laws are broken.

The law requires gun dealers to perform background checks on all buyers. This is also in place when the dealers sell at a gun show.

Still looking for that "Gun Show Loophole"..... All you have given me is liberal drivel hyperbole and propaganda.

You just answered your own question! The fact that we allow private sellers to sell a gun, a deadly weapon without a background check is the loophole!

All gun and ammo sales MUST have a background check done. The only exception is for law enforcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just answered your own question! The fact that we allow private sellers to sell a gun, a deadly weapon without a background check is the loophole!

All gun and ammo sales MUST have a background check done. The only exception is for law enforcement.

Another reality check question.... WHO will run and oversee such a program? Who will enforce such a law? Who will enforce the protection of personal information when these background checks are done? How will such a law be enforced?

Best last question... How will you get the criminals to line up for the background checks when they obtain the guns they have illegally?

La La land is the source of the idea that these kind of laws will ever make a small dent in criminals obtaining and using guns.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy did you blow that one. It was Republicans that pushed, and passed Civil Rights Laws, starting with Lincoln's emancipation, right through Eisenhower sending troops to Little Rock to enforce desegregation, to the Civil Rights Law of 1964, which got only 61% of the Dems votes, but 80% of the Repubs. Dems were in control, without overwhelming support from Republicans, it would never have passed.

To expand upon what KC said: President Eisenhower (who ordered federal troops to enforce desegregation laws) was a strong supporter of civil rights and pushed VERY hard for enactment of federal civil rights legislation. His efforts were for naught, as the Senate Majority Leader, the then-senior Senator from Texas, refused to allow the bills passed by the House to come to the floor of the Senate for a vote.

A number of years later, when some political winds shifted and it was PERSONALLY profitable politically for that former Senator to support the legislation, he changed his tune. The same man who stymied passage of civil rights laws in the mid-50's is, to this day, lauded for signing those same laws a decade later.

Who? Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Racist and political opportunist.

Democrat, from a long line of Democrat racists -- they are the party that started and populated the KKK. They are the party that instituted the very FIRST gun-control laws -- designed to prevent the newly-freed blacks from arming themselves for their own defense against the KKK. After all, you don't want your victims able to fight back.

Don't bother with ad hominem attacks -- you just point out your own ignorance and I pay no attention. Look it up yourself; the facts are historically correct.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just answered your own question! The fact that we allow private sellers to sell a gun, a deadly weapon without a background check is the loophole!

All gun and ammo sales MUST have a background check done. The only exception is for law enforcement.

Should we also require background checks for anyone selling ANY deadly weapon? Knives of every variety, box cutters, baseball bats, crowbars, lug wrenches, pipe and the list goes on...

"Sorry ma'am, I cannot sell you that kitchen carving knife without fingerprints and a background check."

"Sorry son, all little league games have been cancelled because there was no background check done on the people that purchased the bats."

REALITY AGAIN!! A gun is only a deadly weapon when in the hands of a criminal with deadly intent. I took one of my pistols and placed it on a chair in my bedroom. Two weeks later and not a single shot had been fired. If the gun is the deadly weapon, I would have been dead a long time ago.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taxed

If you can't distinguish the potential of lethality and deadly harm between a gun and a kitchen knife or baseball bat then there is no point in debating this.

The whole point of background checks is to reduce the number of people who should not have a gun because they are more likely to use it with criminal intent. A background check may discover people who have criminal history or severe mental issues dangerous enough to responsibly own a gun.

I have heard the standard NRA line, "it is not the gun but the finger that pulls the trigger that is responsible". True and we need to reduce as much as we can those "irresponsible fingers" that will pull the trigger. And a background check for all gun and ammo sales is at least a start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why Ammo? If you have a gun, why a background check on ammo? That is just more liberal drivel. You passed a check to get a gun, now we are going to check again for ammo? How frikkin stupid is that?

Only a dumb a$$ lib would think that is a good idea.

Tom

Hollister, CA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can't distinguish the potential of lethality and deadly harm between a gun and a kitchen knife or baseball bat then there is no point in debating this.

Look up the statistics about what weapons cause the most deaths....

But then, why bring facts and reality into this discussion??

You have not yet responded with how to get the criminals to line up for background checks, or how to get them to turn in their guns and ammo.

I know, criminals are not necessarily the brightest bulbs in the place, but do you think ANY of them will allow a background check to be done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taxed

We start with background checks to reduce the # of people who are not responsible to own guns and we start prosecuting criminals to the full extent of the law. Over time it will reduce the illegal ownership of guns.

This is not a quick fix and will take political courage and leadership to do what is right to reduce gun related crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We start with background checks to reduce the # of people who are not responsible to own guns and we start prosecuting criminals to the full extent of the law. Over time it will reduce the illegal ownership of guns.

This is not a quick fix and will take political courage and leadership to do what is right to reduce gun related crimes.

How do we get everyone to consent to a background check? And how is that going to prevent a person of criminal intent from obtaining a gun illegally? Give me a PRACTICAL answer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We start with background checks to reduce the # of people who are not responsible to own guns and we start prosecuting criminals to the full extent of the law. Over time it will reduce the illegal ownership of guns.

This is not a quick fix and will take political courage and leadership to do what is right to reduce gun related crimes.

Who is going to decided what in a background check keeps you from owning a gun? The government? Ha! They will take them from everybody. That is why the constitution specifically give the right to keep and bear arms. It is a personal right. Now some crazy libs want to make that a privilege, subject to permission of the government. That is not what the constitution says.

If those dumb a$$ libs wouldent have weakened our punishment system, and our law enforcement had real teeth instead of being another supid social engineering experiment, then criminals would be afraid of using a gun as a crime. If you know you will hang in the public square for your crime, you might think again. But the race baiting dumb a$$ libs will see race in everything and find a way to excuse the unacceptable behavior of some socially disadvantaged or ethnic group and scream racism. Then they will blame it on republicans and fox news, because their tiny minds can't think that for themselves.

Isn't that right TAXED. You have a tiny mind that only spits out the liberal garbage that you see on MSN. Bet you are a big fan of Rachel Maddow. See race in everything you think about. Would you allow background checks to limit the right of the people in the inner city to own a gun because there is no place to hunt there? Makes perfect liberal sense. OH - but that would be racial based in your tiny little mind that does not understand a world where race is not a factor in anything. Your superior sense of self decrees that you are right all the time. And even when you are wrong, you can't admit it. You just keep drivelling on about how great the toker in chief is and how his policies will save us all.

What a sad existence your liberal mind must dwell in.

Tom

Hollister, CA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taxed

Amen OldJack.

Bulldog Tom, you are foaming at the mouth! I tried to have a respectable debate on gun control issues but you chose to trade personal insults..

I don't consider myself holier than you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respectable. You called right wing republicans racists. Real respectable. I am a right wing republican. You called me a racist. I will never let you forget that insult.

Go ahead and play the victim. Isn't that what small minded race baiting dumb a$$ libs like you do?

Tom

Hollister, CA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom, I've kept my mouth shut and stayed out of this discussion, but I have to say that you've offended in the same way that anyone placing labels "with the broad brush stroke" (quoting you there) does. I consider myself to be middle-of-the-road, more of a centrist. I don't totally buy into the political platform of either party, but I am registered as a Democrat. Not everyone registered as a "D" is a mindless Stepford voter, just as I am sure that not every "R" voter supports that platform 100% of the time either. I am a D that owns a gun and supports the right to do so. My husband, also a D, was a longtime member of the NRA but dropped his membership many years ago, not because of the legislation they support or promote, but having to do with a particular MD individual they chose to support even after it was shown that that individual was corrupt on many levels, personally and professionally.

I am also a D that thinks along the lines like Jack from Ohio about taking personal responsibility. I believe in some help for those truly in need on a short-term basis to get back on their feet, but the total welfare state that we have today rewards people for choosing not to work, or work a little, or have more children, and I have a problem with that.

I liked the idea someone had, sorry I don't remember who it was, that said the EIC should be removed from the return and managed by the state office that handles other welfare benefits. Let the potential recipient take their completed tax return and other documentation to that office to apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd really like to get back to a discussion of the ACA since that was the original topic of the thread. I am planning to take one or more courses to try to not be bewildered. One of Jack in Ohio's posts mentioned formulas and tables that will be problematic. I'm hoping that most of that will be built into our software much like all of the other fomulas and tables that are incorporated into the software for the returns we now prepare. Maybe I'm being naive, but why would I have to manually go to a table to plunk in a number into my program or form? I could see that if I was preparing a return with paper and pencil, but I really don't think that will be the biggest hurdle. I think it will be getting the required information from the clients and that they won't want to pay one cent extra in fees for our time to prepare these returns in future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom, I've kept my mouth shut and stayed out of this discussion, but I have to say that you've offended in the same way that anyone placing labels "with the broad brush stroke" (quoting you there) does. I consider myself to be middle-of-the-road, more of a centrist. I don't totally buy into the political platform of either party, but I am registered as a Democrat. Not everyone registered as a "D" is a mindless Stepford voter, just as I am sure that not every "R" voter supports that platform 100% of the time either. I am a D that owns a gun and supports the right to do so. My husband, also a D, was a longtime member of the NRA but dropped his membership many years ago, not because of the legislation they support or promote, but having to do with a particular MD individual they chose to support even after it was shown that that individual was corrupt on many levels, personally and professionally.

I am also a D that thinks along the lines like Jack from Ohio about taking personal responsibility. I believe in some help for those truly in need on a short-term basis to get back on their feet, but the total welfare state that we have today rewards people for choosing not to work, or work a little, or have more children, and I have a problem with that.

I liked the idea someone had, sorry I don't remember who it was, that said the EIC should be removed from the return and managed by the state office that handles other welfare benefits. Let the potential recipient take their completed tax return and other documentation to that office to apply.

I am very sorry. My jabs were intened for one person on this board. It was not you. I will make sure in the future to talk only about "that dumb a$$ liberal TAXED" so as not to offend anyone else who considers themselves a liberal.

By the way, it was me who had the idea about EIC going to the states.

Tom

Hollister, CA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taxed

Bulldog Tom take a chill pill! It is only a debate. I can not change your views and you can not change mine. But your words like " I will never let you forget that insult" and "that dumb a$$ liberal TAXED" is tantamount to threats for expressing an opinion. Where are the forum moderators on this issue?

In this entire thread never have I once traded personal insults with anyone including you. I am sure you are a grown man but you are acting like an immature teenage bully!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Taxed

I'd really like to get back to a discussion of the ACA since that was the original topic of the thread. I am planning to take one or more courses to try to not be bewildered. One of Jack in Ohio's posts mentioned formulas and tables that will be problematic. I'm hoping that most of that will be built into our software much like all of the other fomulas and tables that are incorporated into the software for the returns we now prepare. Maybe I'm being naive, but why would I have to manually go to a table to plunk in a number into my program or form? I could see that if I was preparing a return with paper and pencil, but I really don't think that will be the biggest hurdle. I think it will be getting the required information from the clients and that they won't want to pay one cent extra in fees for our time to prepare these returns in future.

I am sure all the tax prep software will have the calculation to calculate the penalty built in based on some data input on MCC.

If you have Drake, do a sample MA return and answer the Form HC questions as having no health insurance. It will calculate the penalty amount and show the refund or balance due incorporating that penalty. Remember the Federal law was largely based on MA law which thankfully Gov. Romney pushed and signed into law. I was very disappointed when he started running away from his own law last elections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...