Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
then you have most of the main stream media not interested because of party affiliation.
3rd link down at ABC
Most of them had it the other day as well...it just wasn't high enough on the page for some apparently. This claim they have not covered it has been proven false. They have...they still are.
He wants it to be the #1 story. Ahead of impeachment. Because to @GoBirds all of these issues, involving life or death are apparently a game in which he wants to crush the libs.
It does? Why...because he tweeted condolences about gun violence on the anniversary of Parkland?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/14/white-house-commemorates-parkland-victims-calls-gun-control/4484810001/
Do you think background checks, and banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines are a bad thing? Honest question. I don't see how this is coming after your guns.
You don't? I might even be for this, but I'll at least admit the honest truth and say that yes, banning assault weapons means "coming after your guns." What else would it be?
So no really coming after guns in a general sense...but pushing for sensible reform that is long since overdue? Seems a good move...Im all for everything he just stated in that. And have been long before Biden was President.
Ok makes sense from that point of view. As someone who isn't a gun guy I'm really curious because assault weapons being banned seems like a no brainer. Not sure why anyone needs an assault weapon or high capacity magazines. Whats the rational use case for that type of gun? Why should the Joe Schmo have access to that type of weapon?
To form a well-regulated militia, in the actual words of the Second Amendment. It seems almost textually okay by the text of the amendment. Whether or not this is what the amendment intended or how the militia is supposed to be within the law is another thing entirely, and something I'm not a legal expert on. But the text is clear, despite all the hollering to the contrary. It's to form necessary militias.
I think you would find broad support for limiting the top end speed of cars here in the US
An assault weapons ban would have no effect on those already owned so I’m not sure about the logic here.
That's absolutely not necessarily true and any steps to ban assault rifles will prompt either a run on them or mandatory buyback legislation push.
Quit mashing the keyboard with questions you know nobody will answer and spend five minutes thinking about it and you can probably figure it out
Its not a very good analogy. And they have zero relation (and Im sure plenty would be fine with limiting the top end speed of cars).
The second amendment is not going away.
Assault weapons are banned. They are illegal. You can't own them.Neo said:
Its not occupation...its being discussed by the NSC (if you look through the actual emails and message not what the rep decided to talk to fox and friends about and then breitbart took the fox and friends story and opined on it too). And lets not forget they are there because of the actions of Trump and his rally of supporters that decided to become a security risk to congress and others in DC.
The people that went to the Capitol on 1/6 were not armed? They left within hours. As a result there will be a military occupation and fortification of Washington DC for at least 9 months? That doesn’t concern you?
Some were armed. Some had arms with them in DC yes. There was still a threat...including through the inauguration.
Just like clockwork, here you are to defend anything the Libs do no matter how ridiculous. So predictable.
Libs...how is it a liberal issue? Its being based on the NSC.Just like clockwork, here you are to defend anything the Libs do no matter how ridiculous. So predictable.
Come on man, be better.
Just saying man, we know what you are going to post before you post it....does it have to be every thread? We get it. No ones bashing , just asking to be better. TIA.
But then @sho nuff gives this a laugh. Just further proves he's here to troll people that disagree with him and not have discussions. In. Every. Single. Thread.
Yes...does that make them all liberal? Do you think the NSC is acting on politics vs safety?
What politics are those?Retract?
Acting on politics. Purely.
