Bassbob
Emissary
When my daughter was in high school it was not unusual at all to see kids with rifles and shotguns in gun racks in the back window of their trucks. It's still like that here.
Democrats Appear Set to End Public Gun Ownership if They Gain Power in November
- Thread starter Annihilator
- Start date
When my daughter was in high school it was not unusual at all to see kids with rifles and shotguns in gun racks in the back window of their trucks. It's still like that here.
Hasn't the "Antifa starting forest fires" thing already been debunked as another crazypants Qanon conspiracy, and one so dangerous the police are asking people to knock it right off with sharing it? https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/wildfires-rage-false-antifa-rumors-spur-pleas-police-n1239881 Seriously, the Qanon folks make Scientologists look like level-headed Rhodes Scholars.
Where did the narrative of Joe Biden being some Marxist revolutionary come from? Can any of you cite to any legitimate source (not Alex Jonesesque) to back that up? The claim that Biden is going to start building some army of brown shirts and won't call out violence, and to use it in support of Trump is pretty rich when considering it took Trump days to condemn ACTUAL NAZIS after they straight up murdered someone and even then his "condemnation" was as weak as it could be. encourages his rally goers to assault protesters with the claim that he'll pay their legal fees, encourages supporters who rally at statehouses with open carry and signs threatening to lynch a sitting governor, and labels entire ethic groups as rapists and murderers. I worry that some on this page are buying into claims that have no actual evidence. Biden actually DID condemn the violence in Kenosha the day after it happened.
As to the article posted above, lets remember what happened to Beto when he went off on his "Hell yes we're going to take your AR" rant. He tanked. There is certainly a fringe on the left that hates guns. There is a much larger group that grew up with them and enjoys them. A ban is the deathblow to the political career of a politician that votes for it. I'd caution people reading an article from someone with a well-defined bias to consider the source and whether they have an axe to grind that colors their opinion. It could well be a piece designed to creat fear and anger through exaggerated claims. In this case "If forces tied to the socialist/democrat party take both houses of Congress and the presidency, what little remains of free speech, right to assemble, a free press which these days means the Internet, the right to resist tyranny, which means an armed populace, due process of law and the other guarantees of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, will become memories of the past" fits that bill nicely. Remember who fought for net neutrality; it wasn't the GOP. Also remember which presidential candidate calls for and approves of brutalizing and extra-judicial killing of suspects. Hint: it's not Biden.
As to the article's claim that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional, he's very likely wrong. Heller v. District of Columbia, the case that clarified the individual right to own firearms, and which was written by the convservative and ultraoriginalist Justice Scalia, states as follows: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose... Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms." It is legally wrong to say that there cannot be a limitation on the right to own and carry firearms.
We all have our opinions but lets try to keep them factual and consider the source before taking something as gospel.
I've said my piece and won't comment any more on this thread.
Where did the narrative of Joe Biden being some Marxist revolutionary come from? Can any of you cite to any legitimate source (not Alex Jonesesque) to back that up? The claim that Biden is going to start building some army of brown shirts and won't call out violence, and to use it in support of Trump is pretty rich when considering it took Trump days to condemn ACTUAL NAZIS after they straight up murdered someone and even then his "condemnation" was as weak as it could be. encourages his rally goers to assault protesters with the claim that he'll pay their legal fees, encourages supporters who rally at statehouses with open carry and signs threatening to lynch a sitting governor, and labels entire ethic groups as rapists and murderers. I worry that some on this page are buying into claims that have no actual evidence. Biden actually DID condemn the violence in Kenosha the day after it happened.
As to the article posted above, lets remember what happened to Beto when he went off on his "Hell yes we're going to take your AR" rant. He tanked. There is certainly a fringe on the left that hates guns. There is a much larger group that grew up with them and enjoys them. A ban is the deathblow to the political career of a politician that votes for it. I'd caution people reading an article from someone with a well-defined bias to consider the source and whether they have an axe to grind that colors their opinion. It could well be a piece designed to creat fear and anger through exaggerated claims. In this case "If forces tied to the socialist/democrat party take both houses of Congress and the presidency, what little remains of free speech, right to assemble, a free press which these days means the Internet, the right to resist tyranny, which means an armed populace, due process of law and the other guarantees of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, will become memories of the past" fits that bill nicely. Remember who fought for net neutrality; it wasn't the GOP. Also remember which presidential candidate calls for and approves of brutalizing and extra-judicial killing of suspects. Hint: it's not Biden.
As to the article's claim that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional, he's very likely wrong. Heller v. District of Columbia, the case that clarified the individual right to own firearms, and which was written by the convservative and ultraoriginalist Justice Scalia, states as follows: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose... Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms." It is legally wrong to say that there cannot be a limitation on the right to own and carry firearms.
We all have our opinions but lets try to keep them factual and consider the source before taking something as gospel.
I've said my piece and won't comment any more on this thread.
Last edited:
I've started this post a couple of times, and then erased what I was typing, because I would probably be banned permanently by the mods of the site. My thoughts concerning the November election come down to either you believe in the freedoms of this nation, and actually want them to continue, or, you'll cast a vote that will contribute to putting us into a rapid downward descent that we probably will not be able to return from. Just a general statement, but it's time a whole lot of folks around this country remove their heads from their posterior end, and actually open their eyes to what is happening. I'm done now, before I say what I'm actually thinking.
Bassbob
Emissary
So do you think the laws in California regarding guns are constitutional?
Peglegjoe
Professional
Regardless of your political affiliation, all you have to do (and I've said this before) is look at what's happening in our nation.
SOME cities (or states) are being burned. Looted. Rioted in. Cops are being attacked, assassinated, and abused.
SOME areas simply aren't prosecuting criminals for these actions.
SOME areas show zero official support (and even official disdain) for law enforcement.
SOME areas allow (even encourage) illegal immigrants, with no regard nor respect for Federal law or for legal citizens.
SOME areas have monuments that are being destroyed, vandalized, and removed.
SOME areas have massive debt loads from decades of mismanagement, and expect the Fed to simply bail them out.
SOME areas have massive land mismanagement policies that allow huge, destructive forest fires, every year.
SOME areas have posses of rioters, yelling at patrons in outdoor restaurants for no reason other than to ruin their meals.
SOME areas have huge crime rates.
SOME areas have massive gun crime levels (usually hand-in-hand with uber-strict gun control legislation).
SOME areas have "bail reform" laws that put criminals (including arsonists) back out on the streets IMMEDIATELY, allowing them to commit more crimes and harm more people and property. Immediately.
Other cities (and states)....do not have those problems. And, never have.
Now - look at who runs which locales. Look at who has run them, for decades.
Doesn't matter who you are affiliated with - facts are facts.
Who would YOU like to see running our Nation?
Who would YOU like to see in charge of your safety, your family's safety, and your ability to pursue happiness?
Regardless of how you like or dislike a particular candidate, you need to look at the Party's record and see what they're really about. You can't go based on what they say in a campaign - you have to look at the track record.
Screw the press. Screw the ads. Screw the candidates. Look at the track record, and form your own opinions.
SOME cities (or states) are being burned. Looted. Rioted in. Cops are being attacked, assassinated, and abused.
SOME areas simply aren't prosecuting criminals for these actions.
SOME areas show zero official support (and even official disdain) for law enforcement.
SOME areas allow (even encourage) illegal immigrants, with no regard nor respect for Federal law or for legal citizens.
SOME areas have monuments that are being destroyed, vandalized, and removed.
SOME areas have massive debt loads from decades of mismanagement, and expect the Fed to simply bail them out.
SOME areas have massive land mismanagement policies that allow huge, destructive forest fires, every year.
SOME areas have posses of rioters, yelling at patrons in outdoor restaurants for no reason other than to ruin their meals.
SOME areas have huge crime rates.
SOME areas have massive gun crime levels (usually hand-in-hand with uber-strict gun control legislation).
SOME areas have "bail reform" laws that put criminals (including arsonists) back out on the streets IMMEDIATELY, allowing them to commit more crimes and harm more people and property. Immediately.
Other cities (and states)....do not have those problems. And, never have.
Now - look at who runs which locales. Look at who has run them, for decades.
Doesn't matter who you are affiliated with - facts are facts.
Who would YOU like to see running our Nation?
Who would YOU like to see in charge of your safety, your family's safety, and your ability to pursue happiness?
Regardless of how you like or dislike a particular candidate, you need to look at the Party's record and see what they're really about. You can't go based on what they say in a campaign - you have to look at the track record.
Screw the press. Screw the ads. Screw the candidates. Look at the track record, and form your own opinions.
Annihilator
Emissary
if you knew how many times I had to bite my tongue posting this.....lol.....I’m with you.
Annihilator
Emissary
Amen....well said.
jumpinjoe
Hellcat
Here's the thing folks, The Constitution was signed Sept. 17, 1787—233 years ago. That makes it the oldest constitution of any government in the world. It's also the shortest written..............................
I don't know but it seems to me it's worked pretty damned well all this time. I can see absolutely no reason for it to be changed in any way except by provisions set forth in Art, 5. I just don't believe there is any individual, nor any small. elite group of individuals (I'm referring to politicians and jurists) who are smart enough, or fair enough to make any changes to it.
This is a very important issue to think about in the coming election. More likely than not, there will be at least one (maybe more) seat on SCOTUS to be filled during the next administration. Think hard about how you would want that seat to go during the next administration because it will likely be seated for many years to come..
I don't know but it seems to me it's worked pretty damned well all this time. I can see absolutely no reason for it to be changed in any way except by provisions set forth in Art, 5. I just don't believe there is any individual, nor any small. elite group of individuals (I'm referring to politicians and jurists) who are smart enough, or fair enough to make any changes to it.
This is a very important issue to think about in the coming election. More likely than not, there will be at least one (maybe more) seat on SCOTUS to be filled during the next administration. Think hard about how you would want that seat to go during the next administration because it will likely be seated for many years to come..
KillerFord1977
SAINT
If law enforcement walks off the job or continues to be overwhelmed, gun ownership will continue to be extremely hard to quell.
i dont think even democrat citizens were ready for Portland and its mayor to be run out of his home and police had no ability or desire to intervene. That resonates to any citizen regardless of political affiliation about safety of oneself
i dont think even democrat citizens were ready for Portland and its mayor to be run out of his home and police had no ability or desire to intervene. That resonates to any citizen regardless of political affiliation about safety of oneself
Peglegjoe
Professional
My point exactly.
It's not about "party", or "candidate" - it's about policy, results, and quality of life under each party's governance.
The differences are crystal clear, and there's really no gray areas. And you really can't argue the results.
Like I said - where would YOU prefer to live?
Ask anyone who's fleeing NY state, or NYC, or LA, or Kalifornia, or Washington state, or Oregon...
These things are HAPPENING. People just need to pay attention, and think for themselves (which, unfortunately, is the challenge these days...).
I hope enough people wake up in the next couple of months, and simply stay away from the Left. I know I don't want to live that way...
It's not about "party", or "candidate" - it's about policy, results, and quality of life under each party's governance.
The differences are crystal clear, and there's really no gray areas. And you really can't argue the results.
Like I said - where would YOU prefer to live?
Ask anyone who's fleeing NY state, or NYC, or LA, or Kalifornia, or Washington state, or Oregon...
These things are HAPPENING. People just need to pay attention, and think for themselves (which, unfortunately, is the challenge these days...).
I hope enough people wake up in the next couple of months, and simply stay away from the Left. I know I don't want to live that way...
Keystone19250
SAINT
From your keyboard to the voters eyes.
you nailed it Peg the problem is people are used to being lied to by politicians that they accept the bull
as gospel. if the Democrats get into office the country is in deep
. something interesting I read posted on FB by an ex Cuban native who now lives in Florida. He went onto say what he sees that is happening in the USA is the exact same thing that happened in Cuba. And now that country is either ultra rich or extreme poor. That’s what the Democrats want here, they want to disarm us and have to beg for the scraps from Democrats table.
jumpinjoe
Hellcat
Unfortunately this is one of the major problems today. Kids, and yeh I consider them kids, especially the Gen Y's and Z's in general do not have a clue about world events or even their own country around them. If they don't or can't see/hear/post/view it on their smart phones, they don't even deal with it, or want to deal with it. They don't know how to deal with it ..... they need a 'safe room' somewhere to escape the confusion (confusion to them). And the vast majority of what they see/hear on those phones is from others (followers) with the same lack of knowledge and/or common sense, so it all falls into line with their way of thinking........ or their way of thinking falls into line with the majority of what they see/hear so they typically see no need to even look for another reason or viewpoint.
Now I know it's not every one of them and yes I'm painting with a broad brush in my preceding assertions and in all honesty I'm not accusing every single one of them. But it's the majority of young people today. Just watch the news reports about all the rioting, arson, vandalism, looting, etc. The vast majority of those involved are young, teens and very young adults. And it's very sad since those are our leaders of tomorrow. And I'm not knocking on the earnest protestors, just the rioters. But even at that it seems the earnest protestors won't/can't separate out from their ranks those bad actors.
Watch a few "Man on the street" type surveys. The majority can't even tell you who the current administration is, or who is running against them. Few can tell you more than 1 or 2 of the B of R's even by principal, much less by number. Even fewer can tell you the first few words to the Declaration of Independence, the Pledge of Allegiance, or the National Anthem. Their argument is that they don't need to know it 'cause they can find it on Google. I say BS to that premise. If you don't know about it and/or have never been exposed to the greatness and goodness of this country, then you'll likely never have occasion to 'find it on Google'.
I just read an article today that according to a survey, 2/3rds of these lids do not even know about the holocaust, and if they have heard of it have no idea what it was or the numbers of those killed. For crying out loud people, that's 66% of today's kids and young adults. 66%!!!! This exhibits just another step in the total collapse of our great country and our form of representative government. Typically considered the greatest, most noble country ever created by man. I personally agree with that last statement and am terribly concerned that we are about to lose this country, it's ideals, and what it stands for, and that once lost will never be regained.
Right on with what you said their track record say it all.
wmg1299
Professional
I, like most posters here, am very concerned about the future of our nation. I live in Texas and have witnessed a historic influx of people from California, New York, and other blue states over the past few years. They came here because either they fled policies that taxed them excessively while providing a poor quality of life in return, or because their employer fled for the same reason. What boggles my mind is that these new arrivals seem to honestly believe that Texas needs to do things the exact same way as the state they just fled. I just can't understand it, and I have no idea how to make these people see what should be obvious.