'I Reacted As A Father': Parkland Dad On Gun Hearing

That's no excuse. He should have been thrown out after ignoring the first warning. But of course it's candy ass Nadler we're talking about.

This man lost his son to a blockhead with a GUN and how can a WALL have STOP a fool in Florida with a GUN, if that wall is on the southern border?

This is what I understand happened.

On yesterday, Manuel Oliver was at a Congressional hearing about background checks for all gun sales. That's when Rep. Gaetz took the time to argue for a border wall.

"There's a whole protocol to get there, to get to this hearing, and you're going ruin it by bringing up a subject unrelated," said Oliver, who interrupted Gaetz several times at the hearing. "If anyone has the power to make the other one leave the room, that's me, by voting for someone else."

I think that Manuel Oliver did right to bring attention to this complete waist of important time to discuss a totally off subject topic, from GUNS to a WALL.

Really, .

This man is nobody special Ron. Our elected leaders always use these platforms to say whatever they wish, that is their prerogative. Those in the gallery need to keep their mouths shut. This hispanic Democrat should have been thown out for his flagrant attack on democracy. Did you kow that Nadler refused to allow Steve Scalise to testify? Did you watch this testimony?

http://blackinamerica.com/cgi-bin/blog.cgi...

You never did answer my question:

"This man lost his son to a blockhead with a GUN and how can a WALL have STOP a fool in Florida with a GUN, if that wall is on the southern border of Mexico?

Listen to what Gaetz actually said Ron and you might realize what a foolish question that is.

To tell you the truth Steve, For that meeting was called to order to talk about GUN registration, and then got HY-Jacked to the subject of a WALL and this meeting was in Florida, still stands?

What did Gaetz actually say why he brought up the wall issue Steve?

"This man lost his son to a blockhead with a GUN and how can a WALL have STOP a fool in Florida with a GUN, if that wall is on the southern border of Mexico?

Gaetz begins at 1:32 Ron, now do your due diligence. Regardless, that blockhead father in the gallery was required to keep his trap shut and that is a FACT.

Hey Steve, Wasn't that House Judiciary hearing was called together to explore GUNS VIOLENCE?

And that was what Gaetz was talking about. He cited a number of cases where illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the United States and stated that a wall at the border would prevent such cases of gun violence. He was on topic and CORRECT.

Again, the Parkland dad is no one special and had no business interrupting Gaetz, and that was confirmed by chairman Nadler and ignored by you Ron.

Guns are the problem in Florida, not a wall and the subject was on background checks to buy a fire arm until that U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II for Florida's 1st congressional district since 2017 went off topic, making his point that a wall is more important than the GUN safety of his constituents, right their in Florida. WOW!!!

Hey Steve, Wasn't that House Judiciary hearing was called together to explore GUN VIOLENCE?

YOUR REPLY: And that was what Gaetz was talking about. He cited a number of cases where illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the United States and stated that a wall at the border would prevent such cases of gun violence. He was on topic and CORRECT.

MY REPLY: Guns are the problem in Florida, not a wall and the subject of that meeting was on background checks to buy a fire arm until that U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II for Florida's 1st congressional district since 2017 went off topic, making his point that a wall is more important than his constituents, right their in Florida. WOW!!!

I also want to add about this line: And that was what Gaetz was talking about. "He cited a number of cases where illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the United States and stated that a wall at the border would prevent such cases of gun violence. "

MY QUESTION: Did U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II talk about how many illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the State of Florida? Well.... Did he Steve?

That is what Mr. Manuel Oliver was upset about and he felt that the people at that hearing was getting the run around by his Republican State Representative, bottom line.

If that's what you think Ron then you didn't listen to what Gaetz said. Background checks within a state are the prerogative of the state, not the federal government. The federal government has no constitutional authority to force the states to do it. None of the witnesses I heard got this point right. Like you Ron they have no understanding of what a so-called universal background check really is. I dare you to find in the constitution where it's authorized. Double dare you.

Again, the Parkland dad is nobody special. As a GUEST at the hearing his job was to keep his yap shut.

MY QUESTION: Did U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II talk about how many illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the State of Florida? Well.... Did he Steve?

Was this gun violence prevention hearing for the state of Florida only?

And is the state of Florida free from the scourge of illegal criminal squatters?

Was this gun violence prevention hearing for the state of Florida only? YES....

And is the state of Florida free from the scourge of illegal criminal squatters? I DON'T KNOW.

MY QUESTION: Did U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II talk about how many illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the State of Florida? Well.... Did he Steve?

This hearing wasn't only for Florida. The Democrats all want gun control, including my representative Chrissy Houlahan. It's at the top of their agenda. Your question is irrelevant because every congressperson got five minutes to use as they wished. Didn't you hear Nadler shutdown not just the Parkland dad's objections but also those of other committee members like Cicilline?

In U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II five minutes, did he talk about how many illegal aliens committed murder with guns in the State of Florida? Well.... Did he Steve?

You listened to it Ron, you tell me. I don't remember and I don't care.

Since you have no interest and you just don't care, then WHY are you HERE?

That man was telling the country that a wall along the Mexican border would be more helpful than anything having to do with the elimination of the restriction of GUN ownership and usage, how do you deal with something as irrational as that coming from an Elected official?

Since you have no interest and you just don't care, then WHY are you HERE?

I'm here to say this Ron:

Again, the Parkland dad is nobody special. As a GUEST at the hearing his job was to keep his yap shut.

Friday, February 8th 2019 at 5:56PM
Steve Williams | delete

Jerry Nadler agrees with ME not YOU. Did you know that Ron?

YOUR QUESTION: Jerry Nadler agrees with ME not YOU. Did you know that Ron?

WOW!!! Where did that come from Steve, out of your as? LOL!!!

Wait a minute, you call this proof that Jerry Nadler agrees with you, is that right?

If you think Jerry Nadler agrees with you Ron then show me where in these 13-14 minutes or so, where Gaetz is trying to speak - show me where Nadler agrees with you.

I never talked to Jerry Nadler, for me to know if he agree or disagree with me or not. I take it you have?

Now as Jerry Nadler agreeing with U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II, rant on a wall on our southern border VS GUN legislation was not brought out in this material. SORRY!!!

You gave an opinion on Gaetz's statement on a border wall whereas Nadler did not. I gave an opinion on the Parkland dad and Nadler gave the SAME opinion. All you have done Ron is to defend the indefensible actions of this Parkland dad, as if he is somehow special, not subject to the same rules as the rest of the guests.

No!!! Steve, my point is, that U.S. State Representative Matthew Louis Gaetz II talking about a WALL: is not more important then protecting his constituents against hand guns in Florida, in a meeting that was called to discuss GUN provisions, like universal GUN Background checks.

Now, I think that Manuel Oliver did right to bring attention to this complete waist of important time to discuss a totally off subject topic, from GUNS to a WALL.

As far as Nadler is concerned, it is his job to maintain order in that meeting and he is not agreeing with you about a WALL on our southern borders.

Here's the good news Ron. Your Gun Violence Prevention hearing, that was turned into a partisan mockery by the Parkland dad, will come to naught. Do you know why Ron? Because your blue wave was a dud and you will never get your hoped for gun grab through the Senate, no matter how much time you waste in the House.

The House was apart of The American plan to take back the power from one party rule and you see what that got us as a country, now don't you? The Senate and The Presidency is next.

You lost Senate seats in 2018 and you'll lose more in 2020 because the American people will see how bad you screw up in the House these next 2 years.

The American people saw how the President Screwed up for 35 days, without a CLUE what to do, that alone will insure a blue wave victory in the Senate and The Presidency.

Steve, not to mention Mueller's Investigations and all of The House Committees Investigations, I believe The American people will find out, who is in The Oval Office and we will not like what we see.

You make me laugh Ron, you are so desperate. Are you tired of talking about the wall? Have you seen the video of an illegal MS13 member committing murder with an illegal gun on a New York subway platform? The onlookers had nothing but cellphones to shoot back with. So much for your liberal American utopia.

Why don't you want to learn more about Trump? As far as an illegal MS13 member committing murder.

No, start a blog Steve.

Why should I start a blog, when that story figures both on the need for a wall AND the ineffectiveness of gun laws. Or maybe you think that murderer passed a background check and purchased his gun legally? Likewise, one of those 40,000 victims in Nadler's 2017 statistics was my son. His murderer was a twice-convicted gun-related felon. Do you think HE passed your stupid background check? YOU ARE A FOOL RON!

Gun's are used to kill people and I 'am sorry for your loss. The way it is now, is not working. Now I do believe, that step to make it harder for a twice-convicted gun-related felon to go to a Gun Show and purchase a weapon in many states in this country, must take place.

Who knows, somebody might be thinking of a Civil War! WOW!!!

You live in Chicago, Illinois and you know in your state a gun cannot be purchased without a background check. You know that Chicago is awash with murderers that will not in the least be deterred by a background check.

Just right over the Indiana border you can buy a weapon real easy and that is were Chicago's problems with GUNS is.

Do you think a wall will work in the case too, Steve?

No Ron, you are perpetuating a myth. An Indiana resident can NOT legally sell a gun to an Illinois resident without a background check. If they do it is a FEDERAL FELONY.

Let us get back to Florida for a moment. "In Florida, to buy a gun you do not need a permit, you do not need a gun license, and once you buy it you do not need to register it."

This information tracks with the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, which lobbies for the NRA and tracks laws relating to gun use. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement also says the state does not require a specialized permit to buy a firearm, including rifles and shotguns.

To buy a gun in Florida, buyers must be 18 for a rifle or 21 for a handgun. They do not need a permit and are not fingerprinted. A background check is conducted using demographic data.

Steve, "You can buy as many guns as you want at one time."

Florida has no law against bulk gun purchases or sales, according to the Giffords Law Center, a group that pushes for gun safety. (We also could not find such a law on the books.)

The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives previously required sellers to report multiple specific semi-automatic rifle sales to one buyer in Arizona, New Mexico, California and Texas. People in other states can choose to report suspicious sales, but do not have to.

In Florida, someone must wait three days before a purchased handgun can be delivered, due to a constitutional amendment passed in 1990. However, this only relates to handguns, like pistols or revolvers.

The Florida Gun Show kicks off this weekend at the Florida State Fairgrounds. With discussions about gun control, the show is obviously drawing some controversy, Especially when it comes to the so called “gun show loophole.”

The loophole allows people to buy a gun without getting a background check, however, it’s not necessarily a gun show issue.

Of the hundreds of vendors at the fairgrounds for the event, more than 95 percent of them are required by law to run background checks as licensed dealers.

That leave 5% gun show licensed dealers that can sell a weapon to anyone with the money, including that felon you referred to earlier.

So that is the problem in Florida. I will talk about the Chicago GUN connection later.

It's one thing when YOU put out misinformation Ron but there is no excuse for politicians doing it. TO BE CLEAR, there is no so-called "gun show loophole" in Florida, and I can also tell you the same is also true in Illinois.

Gun Show Laws By State and the Gun Show Loophole - by
Ben Garrett Updated January 24, 2019

At gun shows, both official firearms retailers and private individuals sell and trade firearms to large numbers of potential buyers and traders. These gun transfers are not regulated by law in most states. This lack of regulation is called the "gun show loophole." It is praised by gun rights advocates but denounced by gun control supporters, as the loophole allows persons who would not be able to pass a Brady Act gun buyer background check to illegally obtain firearms.

Gun Show Background

The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) has estimated that 5,000 gun shows are held annually in the U.S. These shows attract tens of thousands of attendees and result in the transfer of thousands of firearms.

Between 1968 and 1986, gun dealers were prohibited from selling firearms at gun shows. The Gun Control Act of 1968 barred Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders from making gun show sales by ordering that all sales must take place at the dealer’s place of business. The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 reversed that portion of the Gun Control Act. The BATFE now estimates that as many as 75% of weapons sold at gun shows are sold by licensed dealers.

Steve The Gun Show Loophole Issue

The “gun show loophole” refers to the fact that most states do not require background checks for firearms sold or traded at gun shows by private individuals. Federal law requires background checks on guns sold by federally licensed (FFL) dealers only.

The federal Gun Control Act of 1968 defined “private sellers” as anyone who sold fewer than four firearms during any 12-month period. However, the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act deleted that restriction and loosely defined private sellers as individuals who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood.

Proponents of unregulated gun show sales say that there is no gun show loophole — gun owners are simply selling or trading guns at the shows as they would at their residences.

Federal legislation has attempted to put an end to the so-called loophole by requiring that all gun show transactions take place through FFL dealers. Most recently, a 2009 bill attracted several co-sponsors in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, but Congress ultimately failed to take up consideration of the legislation.

That is the problem, anybody can go to the GUN SHOW and buy and weapon. Steve, Don't you want to stop that abuse?

It's not true that "most states do not require background checks for firearms sold or traded at gun shows by private individuals." I think there are something like 14 states where that is true. Lies like these are why Congress will not pass a so-called "universal background check". Keep lying Ron and you WILL keep waiting.

Federal "gun show loophole" bills were introduced in seven consecutive Congresses: two in 2001,[14][15] two in 2004,[16][17] one in 2005,[18] one in 2007,[19] two in 2009,[20][21] two in 2011,[22][23] and one in 2013.[24] Specifically, seven gun show "loophole" bills were introduced in the U.S. House and four in the Senate between 2001 and 2013. None passed.

Did you read the first paragraph to that link you sent me, Steve?

While the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of private citizens to keep and bear arms, there are some limits and regulations on how they are sold and who may possess them. Federally licensed firearms dealers are required by federal law to conduct background checks on prospective buyers, but private (unlicensed) sellers are not. Some states require background checks for private sales, usually through a licensed intermediary, but others have few to no regulations on private gun sales.

but private (unlicensed) sellers are not.

I told you no lie when you admitted that 14 states where GUN LOOPHOLES exists that is true.

Conform all 14 of those states under one law, until that happens, I told you no LIE, Steve.

I read the first paragraph Ron but the more important information is the table that follows. You will see that almost all states make it a crime to sell a firearm to a prohibited person as defined by federal law. The federal government has no authority under the constitution to force states to do background checks. That is why you will keep waiting and waiting and waiting...

The KEY words in that sentences is: "ALMOST ALL STATES," one nation wide law for the country, will do.

What you are talking about is unconstitutional. It will not do, as proven by history.

When has it been tried, Steve?

Federal "gun show loophole" bills were introduced in seven consecutive Congresses: two in 2001,[14][15] two in 2004,[16][17] one in 2005,[18] one in 2007,[19] two in 2009,[20][21] two in 2011,[22][23] and one in 2013.[24] Specifically, seven gun show "loophole" bills were introduced in the U.S. House and four in the Senate between 2001 and 2013. None passed.

Monday, February 11th 2019 at 3:37PM
Steve Williams

I notice Ron that you have no answer to the question of constitutionality. NO ANSWER, just side-stepping questions. Again, where does the Constitution authorize a so-called "universal background check"?

YOUR WORDS: What you are talking about is unconstitutional. It will not do, as proven by history. Monday, February 11th 2019 at 11:58PM

MY REPLY: It will not do, as proven by history. When has it been tried, Steve? WHAT TIME IN U.S. HISTORY WAS THAT EXPERIMENT TRIED?

History has proven IT WILL NOT DO. The HISTORY is that every attempt to pass it HAS FAILED. That is the power of our Union, that the urban states CAN NOT run roughshod over the rural states. Our Constitution works and HISTORY shows that all your attempts to pass a so-called "universal background check" WILL NOT DO. Since you will not answer MY question Ron, I will. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTION AUTHORIZATION FOR A SO-CALLED UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECK. Existing federal gun laws are "justified" by a broad reading of the interstate commerce clause. There is no interstate commerce involved with private gun sales between residents of the same state. PERIOD.