@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:about gun control , yes. All the past and existing presidents dont have the cojones to begin anything that would upset the NRA and its toadies because it would be political death, thats all. Yet, in the future, that president would probably have more statues built in his/her likeness just because it would show real guts.
No president who attempts to violate the fundamental civil rights of the American people will ever have any statues built in his likeness.
farmerman wrote:Maybe someone should run on that one issue alone and the issue be continued to be brought front in a generational plan.
Promising to violate people's civil rights is a way to
lose an election.
farmerman wrote:Gun control will eventually be passed and itll probably be a bitter resolution that will not be "friendly" to the 2nd amendment.
Gun control was passed in 1934.
Any gun control that is unfriendly to the Constitution will be struck down by the courts.
farmerman wrote:Im a sports gun owner and protection pistol owner. Im appalled at the lax rules at the very fringes of the 2nd amendment that have been included within implied protection that the constitution provides, like unlimited gun purchases, and notifications about lost or stolen guns, or the implied legality of bump stocks.
What is the justification for preventing people from buying multiple guns at once? Sometimes guns are sold in groups because they are part of a collection of historically significant guns.
I notice that you didn't list harmless cosmetic features like pistol grips this time around. Last time you focused exclusively on trying to ban pistol grips. It was quite useful in derailing the entire gun control effort. Not going to self-sabotage this time?
farmerman wrote:When will Congress get a collective sack
Standing up to the freedom haters and passing the SHARE Act would be an excellent start.
farmerman wrote:BTW, explain what and who is it that "regulates" the well regulated militia
The term well-regulated militia means a militia that has trained to the extent that they can fight as a single coherent group instead of fighting as a bunch of uncoordinated individuals.
farmerman wrote:well regulated militia that is given as the reason for unlimited access to guns and gun gadgets that, lets face it, are mostly there to allow some cellar dweller to play like he owns a machine gun.?
The militia would be a reason for people to have
real machine guns. Heavier weapons like anti-tank bazookas and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles too.
