Discussion in 'The Dungeon' started by 50Joe, Mar 29, 2019.
They certainly do not march in lock step, so color me skeptical.
The only pull Trump has in Congress is the realization by the weasels that the electorate supports his position over theirs...and even with that, they'll be cunts about it.
See: John McCain's ACA repeal vote
No, not always but on whatever issues that can serve their vested interests.
Lol oh how I love it when people who have no clue talk. Makes them look so foolish. Trump Jr is on silencercos website first off they are so pro gun. He just put millions into the NFA branch of the ATF to speed up background checks of real firearms. I promise. The Trumps are very pro gun.
Exactly my point. Thank you.
I don’t see it. What do you see, other than the bump stock ban, that leads you to believe that Trump has an initiative to take guns? (The control of guns is already in place and has been for a long time.)
Just curious as to why you feel this way.
He’s making stuff up in his head and just regurgitated it onto this page. It’s literally vomit.
You know the only thing you have to do to make a liberal understand gun laws won’t work. Is play Lil Wayne “gun walk” and I quote
“I'm strapped up, nigga fuck a gun law
See me walking with a limp, that's my gun walk
I don't do no arguin', I let the gun talk”
So a pic of the Trump Jr. holding a handgun with a built in suppressor fills you with great confidence. Okay if that works for you, i'm just not so certain.
By the way, that is one ugly sidearm.
Do you pay attention at all? Trump and his whole family are very pro gun. The only thing anti gun he has ever done is OK the banning of bump stocks. That's the equivalent of banning those stupid three wheeled Bombardier bikes in WERA. Nobody fucking cares. On top of that, he threw the left a bone and caved on something nobody really gives a shit about and got them to shut the fuck up for a bit. Bump stocks are a stupid gimmick. He in no way is chipping away at the second ammendment.
Thanks for the civility, I appreciate your conversational style. Well, here's the thing for me. I'm aware of the various bans, controls, laws etc., for decades. I'll give you one example here of something that concerns me: In Oregon, SB 978. Where is the Republican opposition to it? Various 'control/confiscation' schemes are being either passed or proposed, such as Oregon SB 978, at the state and local levels (and some are reasonable in part). I'd like to see the Republican politicians step up to the plate.
My thoughts are any city or state that attempts to ban guns or the lawful carry of them is in violation of the 2nd amendment of the constitution and should be sued to reverse those laws if they are passed. Any restriction of lawful citizens to be armed is a violation. The 2nd says the right to bear arms, not the right to bear arms in rural areas that have the good fortune to be governed by sane Republican leadership. Nationwide concealed carry was a campaign promise that fell through the cracks. Not sure how, but once the house is back under Republican control, that needs shoved through.
And I believe i've already written that I agree the bump-stock was, for lack of a better word, 'stupid' as you put it; What concerns me is the way the ban was accomplished and the criminalization part involved. Are you paying attention to that part of the dealio?
First read the plaintiff's Complaint, Civil Action 1:18-cv-2988, Guedes & Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc, et al, v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, et al. Then tell me if you think it is simply about the bump-stock per se.
Not a sidearm. Can’t use a silencer for self defense.
You blatantly and provably lie and want people to be civil. Got it. Lol.
If I have a sidearm or any other weapon that I possess legally, even if it has a suppressor attached, I will use it in self-defense if need be. You do what you please.
Regarding what you claim are 'lies' I am posting, once again, take a look at Oregon SB 978 and the federal court case cited in my last post. Are those 'lies'? If you see them as such, then you are putting blinders on yourself for some reason.
I agree I’d like to see them step up. However, I also understand why they’d be less than inclined to do so. They push back against it, and suddenly they’re horrible people that don’t care about the safety of the children ... think of the children!! ... in the next election cycle. Especially in areas like Oregon. Or ... they let it slide and assume the federal gov’t will eventually step in and right the wrongs of unconstitutional local laws. My thoughts, anyway.
Both that and the Hearing Protection Act passed one house, then were killed by weak Republicans. The motivation is probably a political stunt, keep the big issues unresolved so you can promise to fix them if the subjects will just vote for you again...dangle the carrot.
It's extremely overreaching and flat out unconstitutional. Republicans better fight this. Millions of gun owners will become felons with the stroke of a pen. There's a reason that in WA, NY, CT, NV, CO even scattered counties in CA are experiencing sheriffs and citizens practicing civil disobedience and ignoring new gun laws. Law enforcement has refused to enforce the unconstitutional infringements. There are sheriffs in OR doing the same, so SB 978 is going to be a big test on the governments willingness to strip away civil rights, and unquestionably a test on whether the people are free or not.
Separate names with a comma.