Actions in support of the Second Amendment

How come you think that I am not outraged?

Have you ever posted anything about that? The only thing you EVER post is criticism of republicans. Why do you think it's being called out all the time? You don't blame democrats for putting criminals back on the streets. You don't blame democrat run cities for being the most violent in the country. You don't blame democrats for endorsing open borders.

When was the last time you held Biden accountable for the Fentanyl coming into our country? You don't think Fentanyl kills kids?
 
Have you ever posted anything about that? The only thing you EVER post is criticism of republicans. Why do you think it's being called out all the time? You don't blame democrats for putting criminals back on the streets. You don't blame democrat run cities for being the most violent in the country. You don't blame democrats for endorsing open borders.

When was the last time you held Biden accountable for the Fentanyl coming into our country? You don't think Fentanyl kills kids?
Those bases seem to be pretty well covered already.
 
So an article written by an advocacy group that has been caught falsifying its "statistics" to support its viewpoint, that gets the majority of its funding from a lobbyist group that claims to be non partisan but has had one of the most vocal anti gun presidents on its board of directors. Makes about as much sense as the "study" you posted that includes 18 and 19 year olds as children.
 
So an article written by an advocacy group that has been caught falsifying its "statistics" to support its viewpoint, that gets the majority of its funding from a lobbyist group that claims to be non partisan but has had one of the most vocal anti gun presidents on its board of directors. Makes about as much sense as the "study" you posted that includes 18 and 19 year olds as children.
Could you be more specific?
 
I don't disagree with characterizing it as a privilege, but there are many who would disagree with both of us on that.
Except that it's a right, not a privilege in the U.S.. Now that right along with the right to be a free man can and should be taken away if you break certain laws but that would mean gun laws would have to be enforced on a case by case basis, not involving taking the right to bear arms away from law abiding citizens.
 
To which part?
"an advocacy group that has been caught falsifying its "statistics" to support its viewpoint, that gets the majority of its funding from a lobbyist group that claims to be non partisan but has had one of the most vocal anti gun presidents on its board of directors."
 
Except that it's a right, not a privilege in the U.S.. Now that right along with the right to be a free man can and should be taken away if you break certain laws but that would mean gun laws would have to be enforced on a case by case basis, not involving taking the right to bear arms away from law abiding citizens.
I agree with all of that.

What about the case under immediate discussion?
 
"an advocacy group that has been caught falsifying its "statistics" to support its viewpoint, that gets the majority of its funding from a lobbyist group that claims to be non partisan but has had one of the most vocal anti gun presidents on its board of directors."
No. The author is stated on the article itself, I wil not do anyone's research for them as much as I wont tell anyone how to defend their families.
 
Those bases seem to be pretty well covered already.

So to review, the border crisis Democrats say "doesn't exist" is well covered already? The Fentanyl crisis is being well covered?

I asked you once before and I don't believe you answered. We know you see every comment but selectively respond. What is your proposal for the gun situation we have in the U.S.? You play JoeTato Briben for a day. You couldn't possibly be any worse. What would you do about guns?
 
If you're asking about the case in Miramar, it's my belief if they are hit with a felony they should lose their rights to own a firearm.
The linked article you dislike so much shows several examples of situations where convicted felons had their gun-ownership rights restored under the "relief" principle originally intended by Congress to keep the gun manufacturer Winchester in business after their parent company Olin Mathiesen had been found guilty of an illegal kickback scheme involving the international trade in drugs. Do you think they just made up all those cases?

Here is a more detailed analysis of the "relief" law, published by the University of Chicago Legal Forum --

 
So to review, the border crisis Democrats say "doesn't exist" is well covered already? The Fentanyl crisis is being well covered?

I asked you once before and I don't believe you answered. We know you see every comment but selectively respond. What is your proposal for the gun situation we have in the U.S.? You play JoeTato Briben for a day. You couldn't possibly be any worse. What would you do about guns?
The President can do nothing on that line without the help of Congress (assuming here that the Supreme Court will not upend the will of the people and Congress again).
 
You don't have to own anything... it's your choice to continue pretending you're not a democrat.
The Democrats are one of the two big criminal organizations thwarting the will of the American people, the other being the Republicans. They should both be prosecuted under the RICO statute.
 
Back
Top