Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@Baldimo,

Quote:

the NRA supported the bump stock ban

That's not true.

Quote:

Some have used our October 2017 statement to claim that NRA supports ATF’s final rule, but as NRA-ILA’s Executive Director Chris Cox noted only days after our statement was issued, “We don’t believe that bans have ever worked on anything.”

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20181221/nra-statement-on-bump-fire-stock-rule

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

They did indeed support the review by the ATF into the bump stock. They released their statement on Oct 5th 2018.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/nra-says-it-will-back-efforts-to-restrict-bump-stocks/

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

And it's certain no one is going to learn anything about logic reading yours, except how to generate massive chasms in logic.

You cannot point out any errors in his logic.

MontereyJack wrote:

Your specious claim that BLM is really about killing cops, for one.

Telling the truth about leftists is hardly specious.

BLM goons directly protest the fact that police officers are allowed to defend themselves when black people try to murder them.

MontereyJack wrote:

Your contention that the only alternative to separating immigrant moms from their kids at the border and warehousing the kids in massive internment camps was to leave the children alone in the Sonoran desert was another egregious example.

Can you point out any post where he said such a thing?

At any rate, I recall asking if there was any alternative, and no leftist (you included) was able to produce one.

I'll ask again: What should we do with children when their parents go to jail for committing a crime?

Your failure to answer this question speaks volumes about the lack of alternatives.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

did you ever read where I would countenance violence or physical punishment against you or your cronies?
I think not.
As I state, my fear for our future is that gun control, when it finally arrives, will be the result of political "one upmanship" from an ultraliberal USSC down the road.
I want my kids kids to be able to go hunting or engage in target shooting, not become some version of Switzerland.

I'm pretty sure that people are allowed to hunt and target shoot in Switzerland, although European gun laws are indeed too restrictive to pass muster with our Second Amendment.

That said, if you fear draconian gun laws, why do you get so worked up when you see me opposing draconian gun laws?

And if you are so worried about the passage of draconian gun laws, why do you castigate groups (like the NRA) that successfully oppose draconian gun laws?

Your fears will not come to pass. Even if the Supreme Court were to one day allow the government to violate our civil liberties, groups like the NRA would still prevent Congress from passing such things into law.

farmerman wrote:

Try keeping your penchant for violence against those with whom you disagree

What penchant for violence?

farmerman wrote:

and you really should try to understand what this country is all about, (you seem to miss points about "freedoms of xpression, assembly, press, etc "

I don't miss any of those.

Leftists are not actively trying to violate them like they do the Second Amendment however, so they do not come up in discussion often.

farmerman wrote:

as well as several of the "hopes for" mentioned in the preamble.

I couldn't quote the preamble off hand, but I doubt that it contradicts with my position.

farmerman wrote:

Please dont be trying to peddle some of the BS points to which you ascribe as "Fact and evidence" because we sit at one of the most divided times in history

Facts and evidence are not BS.

Reality is important.

farmerman wrote:

and how has unfettered gun availablity helped this republic one jot??

What does unfettered gun availability even mean?

It can't mean "no gun laws" because we've had gun laws since 1934.

If it just means "respecting people's right to have a gun", being free helps us because freedom is a much more enjoyable state of being than serfdom.

farmerman wrote:

We are becoming an authoritarian plutocracy and theyve successfully "created" sides of an argument that neither side recognizes that were being used to benefit others.
I dont think that your one of the plutocrats since you hqve mentioned desires of things to "have", after a certain point of wealth procurement, you really dont care about anything cause its all available to you.

No, I'm not a billionaire (or a millionaire). But I do enjoy my freedom.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Ignorance is not a virtue.

You cannot point out anything untrue in his posts.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

and other prominent pro-gun violence groups like GOA as I recall vehemently disagreed with banning bump stocks.

GOA is hardly pro-violence. They just refuse to compromise like the NRA does.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Baldimo wrote:
the NRA supported the bump stock ban.

That's not true.

The NRA gave the government permission to ban bump stocks so long as it was done via executive order and not via legislation.

Since the government complied with the NRA's instructions, there was no objection from the NRA.

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Some have used our October 2017 statement to claim that NRA supports ATF's final rule, but as NRA-ILA's Executive Director Chris Cox noted only days after our statement was issued, "We don't believe that bans have ever worked on anything."

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20181221/nra-statement-on-bump-fire-stock-rule

Not believing that bans work does not change the reality that the NRA gave the government permission to ban bump stocks via executive order.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

just the usual oralloy blather

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Leftists sure don't like it when I post facts.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Sorry, bad typing, GOAL. If they agued against banning bump stocks, as they did, then they are prima facie pro-violence.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Post some for a change, not your usual illogical opinion masquerading as fact.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

I post facts all the time. That's why the left finds me so frustrating.

You cannot point out any flaws in my logic.

You cannot point out any case of me referring to facts as opinion.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Who or what is GOAL?

At any rate, opposing a ban on bump stocks does not mean that someone is pro-violence. Maybe they just enjoy shooting tin cans using bump stocks.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

YOU said it, not "he".

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Can you point out any post where I said such a thing?

I only recall asking leftists what the alternative was (a question that no leftist could answer).

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You have selective amnesia.You also seem to have selective amnpesia about the fact that I and others offeref=d Obama's far more humanitarian options his admin practiced, viz: finding relatives already in the country to place them with placing them with foster families or humanitarian groups, or setting a court date and letting them go together until then, what Trump derdied as "catch and release". though the migra honchos themselves said it worke d well. Yes, there were alternatives. Yes, thye were discussed here in some detail. Yes, your memory seemingly is going. Have you been checked for early onset Alzheimers lately?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You have selective amnesia.You also seem to have selective amnpesia about the fact that I and others offerefed Obama's far more humanitarian options his admin practiced, viz: finding relatives already in the country to place them with placing them with foster families or humanitarian groups,

Placing the kids with foster families is exactly what Trump is already doing and is what you are condemning him for doing.

MontereyJack wrote:

or setting a court date and letting them go together until then,

A court date for what? When people are convicted of a crime, what do they need a new court date for?

MontereyJack wrote:

Yes, there were alternatives.

So far the only alternatives you offered are:

a) the very thing that Trump is already doing (and that you are condemning him for doing), and

b) letting convicted criminals go free with some sort of new court date. Presumably if they are convicted upon retrial, they will then be freed pending yet another court date?

Any other alternatives?

MontereyJack wrote:

Yes, your memory seemingly is going. Have you been checked for early onset Alzheimers lately?

My memory is fine. I was correct to question whether you could point out any cases where I said what you accused me of saying. Clearly you can point to no such post.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

They arent with foster fsmilies. Theyre warehousded..

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Theyre warehousded..

There are consequences for crossing the border illegally as there should be. It is their own, or their parents fault.

2 Replies

@coldjoint,

For someone who flamed Democrats for being atheists and not acknowledging an unproved superior power, you seem noticeably lacking in any sort of Christian or simply humanitarian charity.

0 Replies

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know