Reply With Quote
Oh good you have a small town school in Pennsylvania covered on the outside. Still not a complete DMC line by line overhaul but ok, only 98000+ schools to go. Chop chop.
Bunch of s got mowed down.
Christian Chris showing his deep beliefs.
Oh good you have a small town school in Pennsylvania covered on the outside. Still not a complete DMC line by line overhaul but ok, only 98000+ schools to go. Chop chop.
How many times has this been told to DMC in the last few days? At least four I think.
Daniel Defense is not attending the National Rifle Association meeting due to the horrifying tragedy in Uvalde, Texas, where one of our products was criminally misused," Steve Reed, vice president of marketing, said in an email. "We believe this week is not the appropriate time to be promoting our products in Texas at the NRA meeting."
......
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/daniel-...ncelation/#app
If they feel guilty to the point of pulling out of the convention then what are we doing?
Same goes for all the politicians that cancelled.
Lol chicken Abbott doing a zoom
You asked me. I didn't ring you up, asshole. You asked if you can walk into an airport freely. Sure you can. I know about TSA, that's my ing point, dip , it's acceptable to screen people before allowing them on a plane but having that level security in a school is over the top.
Because screening people for a plane ride is exactly the same as screening kids to enter a school building in the morning
OK, I just thought the "false" of what I said wasn't "sane".
It's not a single prong issue, but for the gun control prong, knowledge of what you want to legislate (because words matter) is important.
It's nothing like that. Cars have to registered to drive legally. There's a license plate on a car. The reason the vast majority doesn't break the law with cars is because it's readily visible to officers patrolling the streets. It's not breaking the law to have an unregistered firearm, and with 400m firearms in circulation and very few of them registered (and none in a federal registry outside of NFA weapons), there's no way to corral those lose firearms and link them with their owners. It's just not possible. It's not about breaking the law, it's about having the ability to prove it. No one can possibly know what firearms I own other than me, because I could buy from a private seller sans registration or any paperwork, and could have done so as far in the past as probably history goes in the US. How do you propose those guns get linked with their current owners outside of forced entry and search and seizure? "Turn in your guns"? Ok, how do you enforce that?This is like saying this can't be done because "how do you know who owns a car"? Cars are also sold for cash, and a minority of people drive without a license, registration or insurance. The reason the vast majority does not break the law is because they're not criminals, and have no problem being law abiding citizens. That's how you get there.
Enforcement looks exactly the same: police and if you catch them with a weapon with an expired license, or without proof of insurance, or proof of mental health examination, you confiscate the weapon/fine/jail, etc.
Your suggestion is a non starter as if violates many cons utional rights.
Yes it matters, because if the law says "clip" but you have a "magazine" then clips are already extremely limited by design. Magazines will not be covered. The verbiage has to specify magazines. Otherwise when assault weapons get banned, there's simply no way to know what an assault weapon is, so they can ban nothing or everything. It has to be defined ad nauseum and then that which is defined can be regulated. The broad brush attack fails at inception due to rights violations.Because all those technicalities (which is exactly what they are) are used as a crutch to do nothing. Does it really matter if it's a clip or a magazine if the regulated limit is 10 bullets? That conversation is a distraction and pointless.
Because they simply won't make it that far without weaving around rights violations. The left knows this already.How about getting started with some, then see what works and doesn't, and refine it? If you never start, you'll never get there. It's not like you only have one chance to regulate or get it 100% right.
For the wealthy who rely on gun sales, perhaps. Others just want to be left alone. Plenty though, you're probably right. It also boils down to "ha ha you lost".I'd venture that plenty on the right care more about a NRA endorsement hitting all the pro-gun one-liners than they know or care about actual guns. This boils down to campaign money and cred, nothing else.
We've been looking at it for decades.I brought up the fact, and it is a fact, that this is largely a US-specific problem. Maybe it's time we start looking at what other countries are doing right about this, but we probably won't, because it almost invariably involves some form of gun regulation.
No, we had an assault weapons ban. Yes that matters. Do you think assault weapons were no longer sold during that time? Technically you'd be right, but actually the same platform just got some cosmetic changes.The status quo hasn't worked and isn't working. As far as statutes, we had an Assault Rifle ban not that long ago, and passed all cons utional muster back in the day. We can discuss whether it was effective or not, and we certainly gave up on it, but as far as legality goes, that wasn't a problem.
“After the 1994 federal assault weapon ban was enacted, gun manufacturers quickly introduced minor variations on the specific firearm products named in the ban, thereby apparently skirting the ‘copies and duplicates’ restriction,” Wilbur and Balakrishna write. “AR-style rifles today are extremely popular—an estimated 1 to 2 million AR-style rifles were manufactured in 2016 with up to 15 million in circulation.” - Wilbur and Balakrishna
https://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/pressrelea...t-weapons-bans
You might consider "save American lives" to mean "enact laws we think will save American lives". There's where the disagreement happens.
I think they are, especially in this area, where I don't think an executive order would be effective. It's rather puzzling as well, you would think there would be some amount of bi-partisan support to save american lives from these oft-occurring murders.
I guess, some people put an NRA endorsement over the life of children. I frankly find that de able, but everybody is en led to their opinion, decisions and have to live with them.
Where the left thinks removing things they don't use anyhow is the answer, the right thinks the answer lies in not being a soft target. The truth is somewhere between all that. You can bet though that if the left was tasked with giving up their right to free speech they'd riot, and you could easily show that broadcasting ad nauseum the stats and facts of every mass shooter so others out there can worship and copycat them is as big a problem as exists. The same kind of excuses permeate the discussions, only this time from the left. "The person wasn't right in the head, should have been denied a gun, guns shouldn't exist in the 1st place" excuses. Never mind that almost every one of these idiots tells people what they are going to do ahead of time, and many have a "manifesto" that people cannot wait to read. If dude live streamed it many here would have watched it only to say they regret doing so, BUT IT'S MY RIGHT!
Cool, tell that to Blake and the coattail he rides. They seem to think we cannot afford securing our children.When like this happens all over the country, including Las Vegas, San Diego, etc, this isn't a social class problem. The government has zero money problems to fund programs.
Result is the same. All they were lacking is the ability to fight back. Nothing you mentioned is required to have a war.No, the kids were in an active shooter situation. There were no bombs over their heads (we regulate those, BTW), there were no tanks on the street, there were no mortar s s laying siege to the city, etc. Completely different scenario.
The left does the same they always do. They propose a bill, then they all argue over definitions and it stalls, they go to break and ignore it until some national tragedy happens at which point they say "we're really busy working to solve these issues" at which time they drag the bill out and pretend to give it another go. It's not about what they do within the law. , they make the law.You have it backwards. "The left" did as much as the law allows them to do, bring up a bill to a vote on the floor. It was "the right" at that very moment that gave up trying to find a solution to this by voting it down.
So if we can afford it and every NRA Republicans is calling for it then what's the hold up? Where are all the bullet proof windows? It's easy!
You made this up, per the usual.
Hundreds of millions of tax dollars go to Planned Parenthood...Just redirect those funds to schools instead of the DNC.
But that's exactly the point. Words matter when you have something to legislate. When you're dead set against legislating in the first place, the talk about knowledge or words is meaningless, just a distraction.
Of course it is like that. A license plate scan is not going to tell the cop if your car insurance is up to date, for example, yet most people do have their insurance up to date because they don't want to lose the privilege of driving.
Every weapon has a serial number specifically for tracking purposes. If part of the regulation that needs to happen is progressively add every weapon into the NFA registry, then that's what needs to happen. The NFA also already makes it a felony to buy or posses weapons with that number removed. That would indeed make every person who owns or wants to transport, buy or sell a gun to be liable if not registered. We don't need to go back and register older guns (though I don't see a problem with that, if, for example, you want to transport those weapons). It's something that will happen over time for people that legally own guns.
As far as enforcement, nobody is saying you have to break or enter anywhere. You get pulled over and an unregistered gun is found in your vehicle, then it gets confiscated, and proceeds just like what happens with enforcing any illegal act. Same thing if it's found during a security check in the airport, or a frisk on an event, etc.
Please enumerate which cons utional rights are violated here. I can think of zero so far.
We need to get to a draft of a law for this to even become moderately relevant, until then this is all irrelevant chatter.
If we were to take an example, the NFA doesn't appear to be confusing as you claim, so we have an example there where actual gun regulation is pretty clear on what it targets and means.
Based on what? Again, we have and had in the past firearm regulation that is/was perfectly legal. If there's one thing about er is that the SCOTUS itself admitted the 2nd Amendment is not beyond regulation, as long as it's done in a way that doesn't outright deny citizens with the possession of firearms.
Will anything that passes be challenged in court? I expect nothing less. That's not an excuse to do nothing.
"Want to be left alone" is not a solution to this problem. Sorry. We tried that, for decades, as you mention, and we're always back in the same place. That hasn't worked. It's never late to try something else.
This happens with every regulation. It's a cat and mouse game, and most of the time new regulations are needed and enacted to close those loopholes. Happened with Obamacare as well, and almost every regulation out there.
Again, this can't be used as an excuse to do nothing. It's very likely that if a regulation even comes to pass, it will be far from perfect, and will need updates. This is pretty common in every realm.
I've yet to see a single draft or proposal that outright bans the possession of guns from common citizens (from "the left" or anywhere else). I personally wouldn't be onboard with that. IMO, this is another ridiculous boogeyman that doesn't exist, that's used as a crutch to do nothing. It's the whole slippery-slope thing.
The rest, whether he livestreamed, or wrote a manifesto, or used to be a Bernie supporter, or had a pedicure before murdering people... distractions to talk about something else instead of the problem at hand.
Hey Blake, it's not a money problem, it's a policy and stupid dogma problem.
lol no it isn't. They live in a society that's supposed to protect them, because they don't have the mental capacity, much less the training to "fight back" against a dude shooting up with two AR-15s.
With children specifically it's all about prevention, not reaction. And prevention doesn't mean 100% success rate, because that's utopic, but at least reducing the damage as much as possible.
What I mentioned is the type of thing people in Ukraine, which is the actual warzone you brought up, have to deal with every day. But this highlights that it was a terrible example. Nobody in their right mind thinks Uvalde, TX is or was any kind of warzone.
Would be good one day to see what a conservative bill for gun regulation looks like. I'm hoping Mitch wasn't bluffing when he said he wanted Conryn to talk to Dems to come up with something to address this.
But, until then, "the left" is all we have to try to meaningfully address this in a legal manner, as flawed as it might be.
YOU gave an example of security ON AN AIRPLANE. I did not ask you anything about this.
Like there was no security BEFORE getting on THE AIRPLANE.
Dont change your . YOU know about TSA yet said absolutely nothing about TSA.
All to use as an example for security in schools and you just flat out got it very wrong.
You need to stop. Or keep going.
edit: So in your example the teacher also needs to have assistance at her classroom before the kids enter the room I guess.
Because a classroom is just like an airplane: classrooms can just fall out of the sky or ram buildings killing all the kids aboard I guess.
Last edited by pgardn; 05-28-2022 at 08:42 PM.
Can you really trust a man whose father was involved in the JFK assassination (people say, good people)?
Wow, that was a of a primary back in 2016. Trump destroyed his whole family.
The complete pukes the red team puts up to run our country now is just amazing.
Ted fkn Cruz. The easiest man to hate on the planet quite possibly.
Yet he grovels back for his master.
"Donald, please nail my face to the floor. Anything please, I want to be senator.
Look back at Christian Chris thumbs up and you might get it.
I asked you... grand dad dementia
"I have no words, I have no words to say, I don't know what he was thinking. He had his reasons for doing what he did and please don't judge him," Ramos' mother, Adriana Martnez said. "I only want the innocent children who died, to forgive me."
No, every NRA touting Republican is calling for beefing up school security instead of figuring out better laws.
Making up is your wheelhouse, not mine.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
