-
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second)
President Trump on Wednesday voiced support for confiscating guns from certain dangerous individuals, even if it violates due process rights.
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida ... to go to court would have taken a long time,†Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,†Trump said.
-
:facepalm2:
-
Trump was responding to comments from Vice President Pence that families and local law enforcement should have more tools to report potentially dangerous individuals with weapons.
:facepalm2:
Too bad nobody thought to report the guy to the FBI and local police, several times. *****rollingeyes*****
-
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second)
President Trump on Wednesday voiced support for confiscating guns from certain dangerous individuals, even if it violates due process rights.
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida ... to go to court would have taken a long time,†Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,†Trump said.
I see that Trump Il Duce is articulating similar thought processes as all despots do that use the specter of public safety and the security of the state as paramount to individual liberties.
Tomorrow it will be "I like silencing free speech early, like in those libel and slander cases I keep referencing from people who are not nice to me. To go to court to shut them up takes a long time".
Or - as South Africa just did this morning (with a Kelo twist):
"I like taking land and homes away early like from those crazy property rights people that won't sell to developers for bigger tax revenue for the community, because going to court to do so takes a long time and it's costly".
Due process?
Trump: "We can't afford that."
-
Remember when the guy was killed in a 'swatting' prank last December? Wait until people think it's funny to tell authorities you're a mentally unstable gunowner.
http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192111974.html (http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192111974.html)
-
Remember when the guy was killed in a 'swatting' prank last December? Wait until people think it's funny to tell authorities you're a mentally unstable gunowner.
http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192111974.html (http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192111974.html)
I was thinking about that guy in relation to this latest shooting, but in a different way. All it took was one phone call for that guy to end up dead. How man calls to did Cruz have about him in to the FBI and locals?
-
So he'd be okay with a coup to remove the weapons from his hands...."and worry about due process later..."
-
Well Trump, it's been a fun ride, but I'm out. Taking guns without due process is a no go zone for me, worse that it's a kneejerk response to commie agitators pimping dead kids for their gun-grabbing agenda.
I'll focus now on what's happening with what the GOP is doing in my state, who have been kicking tail in the legislature in every direction.
-
Well Trump, it's been a fun ride, but I'm out. Taking guns without due process is a no go zone for me, worse that it's a kneejerk response to commie agitators pimping dead kids for their gun-grabbing agenda.
I'll focus now on what's happening with what the GOP is doing in my state, who have been kicking tail in the legislature in every direction.
He allows his DOJ to confiscate property without due process for possible drug offenses. This really isn't any different.
-
Well Trump, it's been a fun ride, but I'm out. Taking guns without due process is a no go zone for me, worse that it's a kneejerk response to commie agitators pimping dead kids for their gun-grabbing agenda.
I'll focus now on what's happening with what the GOP is doing in my state, who have been kicking tail in the legislature in every direction.
How many times have I heard that before? Did you check the accuracy of the quote yet? Just asking. I haven’t. But if history is any indication it’s probably a distortion, exaggeration or plain old fabrication.
-
How many times have I heard that before? Did you check the accuracy of the quote yet? Just asking. I haven’t. But if history is any indication it’s probably a distortion, exaggeration or plain old fabrication.
Scroll to 1:55
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvK2Q4dX4CQ#)
-
How many times have I heard that before? Did you check the accuracy of the quote yet? Just asking. I haven’t. But if history is any indication it’s probably a distortion, exaggeration or plain old fabrication.
*****rollingeyes*****
You could have watched the video at the site and gotten it straight from him, but I suppose it was doctored.
-
*****rollingeyes*****
You could have watched the video at the site and gotten it straight from him, but I suppose it was doctored.
Jedi mind tricks..... :whistle:
-
*****rollingeyes*****
You could have watched the video at the site and gotten it straight from him, but I suppose it was doctored.
I can't wait to hear the Trumpsplaining on this one.
-
It's for the kids, besides 'due process' is highly overrated.
-
Bwhahahaha!
Aligncare tries to call it a distortion, when it's right in the vid.
Waiting for RIV to come in here and tell us how BRILLIANT this plan is and how RIGHT Trump is again.
Pathetic.
-
I can't wait to hear the Trumpsplaining on this one.
The split screen in Ace's video is good, because you can see the reactions from Scalise and (I don't know who she is) the lady right next to Pence. I'm sure they both wanted something stonger than water after hearing that.
-
How many times have I heard that before? Did you check the accuracy of the quote yet? Just asking. I haven’t. But if history is any indication it’s probably a distortion, exaggeration or plain old fabrication.
http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/take-guns-first-trump-breaks-republicans-gun-control-plan/219949 (http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/take-guns-first-trump-breaks-republicans-gun-control-plan/219949)
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-28/take-guns-first-trump-breaks-republicans-over-gun-control-plan (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-28/take-guns-first-trump-breaks-republicans-over-gun-control-plan)
https://www.longroom.com/discussion/911996/trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second (https://www.longroom.com/discussion/911996/trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second)
http://us.pressfrom.com/news/politics/-123432-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second/ (http://us.pressfrom.com/news/politics/-123432-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second/)
http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/105041/breaking-donald-trump-says-take-them-guns#sthash.E3Km34Ve.dpbs (http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/105041/breaking-donald-trump-says-take-them-guns#sthash.E3Km34Ve.dpbs)
Seems pretty legit! I didn't post links to the gun forums I checked because the language they used was, well @#!&%^*%$#!@#@
-
For the record, when I was in college, a drunk dude attacked me with a baseball bat because his roommate and I were play-wrestling. (As in, we were laughing, and paused to take off his glasses and everything.)
When attacked, I jumped up and defended myself, resulting in a bloody face on his part. I then went to my room to get away from the baseball bat wielding psycho. Well, apparently, someone had called the cops when they saw him attack me with the bat, but when the cops showed up, he was still standing in the hall and started yelling BS about how I had, "Attacked him with a knife!"
Being in ROTC, I had a field knife on my gear in my room. The cops busted in, unannounced, and started screaming, "Where's the knife, where's the knife???" Confused, I pointed out my knife and they promptly arrested me.
When the guys who witnessed the whole thing figured out that *I* was being charged, they went to the police station and gave reports indicating that there was no knife, and that I was, in fact, attacked with a bat. Didn't matter. Police had "diffused" the situation and just went with what they had.
Because I was in ROTC, interested in becoming an officer (at the time), involved in a fight, and had exposure on "disturbing the peace," my lawyer advised me to take "accelerated rehabilitation," which basically meant I did 80 hours of community service and there was no record.
Here's the clincher: standing in front of the judge, I asked my lawyer to request my knife returned to me since it was a gift from my father on my sixteenth birthday. The judge completely ignored the 20-some odd statements from witnesses saying that there was no knife in the altercation, and ONLY looked at the police report which indicated that MY assailant had claimed a knife and one was found. The judge said...
"I can hardly see returning a knife to a dangerous individual like yourself."
My objections were quickly silenced with threats of "full legal action" and all that jazz.
Yeah. Due process. It's a wonderful thing.
-
How many times have I heard that before? Did you check the accuracy of the quote yet? Just asking. I haven’t. But if history is any indication it’s probably a distortion, exaggeration or plain old fabrication.
Here is the video from the meeting, Trump's own words.
http://launch.newsinc.com/embed.html?trackingGroup=91690&siteSection=ndn&videoId=33587463 (http://launch.newsinc.com/embed.html?trackingGroup=91690&siteSection=ndn&videoId=33587463)
-
Gotta give the Trumpers credit here, They told us that our Second Amendment rights would be trampled on if we didn't vote for him.
-
(http://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/28276517_10211702795381218_5372650754490393527_n.jpg?oh=3d25dc0a2d3645c5750d7d1f87f8335e&oe=5B4E58C7)
-
(http://scontent-mia3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/28276517_10211702795381218_5372650754490393527_n.jpg?oh=3d25dc0a2d3645c5750d7d1f87f8335e&oe=5B4E58C7)
Oh, I got fussed at a couple days ago for suggesting such a thing.
-
Don't worry everyone. You can put your trust in the government, they are here to help. There is no way something like this will ever be abused. #MAGA
-
Here is the video from the meeting, Trump's own words.
http://launch.newsinc.com/embed.html?trackingGroup=91690&siteSection=ndn&videoId=33587463 (http://launch.newsinc.com/embed.html?trackingGroup=91690&siteSection=ndn&videoId=33587463)
Stop being a hater. You can't trust a video that has a word for word quote in context showing the accuracy of the report.
-
Here is the video from the meeting, Trump's own words.
http://launch.newsinc.com/embed.html?trackingGroup=91690&siteSection=ndn&videoId=33587463 (http://launch.newsinc.com/embed.html?trackingGroup=91690&siteSection=ndn&videoId=33587463)
Yikes. He just keeps shooting himself in the foot... and not even realizing it. Not very bright. Not bright at all.... tsk tsk.
-
So he'd be okay with a coup to remove the weapons from his hands...."and worry about due process later..."
@Suppressed I can't wait for the apologists to arrive and start telling us why it would be perfectly acceptable for Trump to bypass the 4th Amendment.
Like I said the other day...the 2nd Amendment protects all the other Amendments.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/QQWQoyx.gif)
-
@Suppressed I can't wait for the apologists to arrive and start telling us why it would be perfectly acceptable for Trump to bypass the 4th Amendment.
Like I said the other day...the 2nd Amendment protects all the other Amendments.
Wait until he finds out about all the money he can save on base housing by scrapping the third.
-
I can't believe Pence was able to keep a straight face and just nod solemnly.
-
Paging @Right_in_Virginia , Paging @Right_in_Virginia ...
We're patiently awaiting the Trumpsplaining/comedy routine. Please don't leave us hanging!
-
This was spoken like a man who has had armed security in NYC for the last 30 years.
-
I can't believe Pence was able to keep a straight face and just nod solemnly.
He may not be aware that he is the only person in the administration that can speak his mind and not get fired.
-
This was spoken like a man who has had armed security in NYC for the last 30 years.
And someone who supported Clinton's 1994 AWB.
-
I can’t wait for a Trumpsplanation of what dimension of chess he’s playing since @aligncare ‘s fake news accusation didn’t stick.
-
Feeling better about my vote for Darryl Castle
Trump's conservative roots don't run very deep, as they are relatively new.
-
The priests of Trump's cult of personality will be along shortly to absolve you all of your sin of failing to recognize Trump's genius in this statement. But only upon repentance with the admission that Trump has single-handedly taken the gun control agenda away from Democrats and made it his own personal agenda, and likewise the GOP's.
Higher deficit spending, ObamaCare permanent, Amnesty pushed, Wall obsolete, and now gun control - who says the GOP is different from the Democrats?
WINNING!
-
Feeling better about my vote for Darryl Castle
Trump's conservative roots don't run very deep, as they are relatively new.
Your last sentence is why we get this type of thinking from Trump. Were else is he willing to bypass due process?
This is probably not going to happen but it is a window into his mindset
-
And someone who supported Clinton's 1994 AWB.
Trump has changed his mind (flip flopped) on quite a few issues. The AWB is just one of them.
In a March 2016 debate, Trump was asked to speak to his published support for an assault-weapon ban. He replied: "I don’t support it anymore. I do not support the ban on assault" weapons, he said.
http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2016/apr/12/donald-trump/donald-trump-fully-flip-flops-lately-opposes-ban-a/ (http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2016/apr/12/donald-trump/donald-trump-fully-flip-flops-lately-opposes-ban-a/)
-
Yikes. He just keeps shooting himself in the foot... and not even realizing it. Not very bright. Not bright at all.... tsk tsk.
You have a mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
-
You have a mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
More thought police.
-
You have a mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
If they have probably cause they can arrest and use due process. They can do it today
-
More thought police.
Did the thought police just murder 17 8th graders in Fla while wounding 14 more?
-
Where's our guns=cars insurance guy? I'm sure he could explain how this is similar to having your car towed when under suspicion of DUI. The guns and cars guys ought to join forces and form the NR-AAA.
-
If they have probably cause they can arrest and use due process. They can do it today
There is no probable cause, just crazy talk from a crazy person.
Note the (not actionable) in my post.
-
There is no probable cause, just crazy talk from a crazy person.
Note the (not actionable) in my post.
Define crazy. If they are making threats it is actionable.
-
Did the thought police just murder 17 8th graders in Fla while wounding 14 more?
Doesn't matter. Without specific actions showing specific intent, it is thought police. Be very careful how far down that slippery slope you go.
-
Imagine the reaction we would all have if Barack Obama said the same thing?
-
Imagine the reaction we would all have if Barak Obama said the same thing
But instead Trump said it, and now gun confiscations first with due process later is cheered by Trump's hordes as 'common sense'.
This is how a people who were once enlightened, go down the path of following despotic imbeciles.
They are wrapped up in a cult of personality where nothing matters but the glory of their prince and his reign.
-
Define crazy. If they are making threats it is actionable.
I'll let you define crazy. All Trump is saying is that it might be better to take the guns away from
crazy people acting in a crazy manner until it can be determined that they are not going to harm
anyone. I don't see that as a very big deal. Back in the 50s and 60s this was a fairly common
protocol. Crazy people guns and alcohol do not mix well.
-
Such an incredibly disappointing day
-
Define crazy. If they are making threats it is actionable.
According to liberals, "Global warming is BS," is crazy talk and you should be institutionalized.
Maybe have your guns taken away, too.
-
Doesn't matter. Without specific actions showing specific intent, it is thought police. Be very careful how far down that slippery slope you go.
Well I as sheriff, certainly would have taken Cruz's guns away from him.
-
I'll let you define crazy. All Trump is saying is that it might be better to take the guns away from
crazy people acting in a crazy manner until it can be determined that they are not going to harm
anyone. I don't see that as a very big deal. Back in the 50s and 60s this was a fairly common
protocol. Crazy people guns and alcohol do not mix well.
@jpsb You need to go to the first page and read my fun experience with "due process." Then tell me again how I needn't worry... the gubbermint will "do the right thing" once they determine I'm not crazy.
Yeah, right.
-
I'll let you define crazy.
No, you'll let THEM define crazy.
-
@jpsb You need to go to the first page and read my fun experience with "due process." Then tell me again how I needn't worry... the gubbermint will "do the right thing" once they determine I'm not crazy.
Yeah, right.
@bolobaby he also needs to read #1 in your sig line.
-
I'll let you define crazy. All Trump is saying is that it might be better to take the guns away from
crazy people acting in a crazy manner until it can be determined that they are not going to harm
anyone. I don't see that as a very big deal. Back in the 50s and 60s this was a fairly common
protocol. Crazy people guns and alcohol do not mix well.
Who defines crazy? Why limit it to guns. Just arrest anyone who acts "crazy". Like not believing in global warming or not supporting gay marriage.
The killer committed a felony when he made written threats. A felony. All they had to do is arrest him. Then go to a court and have a judge decide.
Instead you propose letting a cop decide and then letting a judge have input in 6 months or so. That's IF the person has money to fight it.
Yeah we don't need no stinkun constitution.
-
Well I as sheriff, certainly would have taken Cruz's guns away from him.
Not without probable cause you wouldn't.
-
According to liberals, "Global warming is BS," is crazy talk and you should be institutionalized.
Maybe have your guns taken away, too.
The jury is still out on global warming but it is to a large extent not man made and will not threaten
life on Earth anytime soon.
-
Not without probable cause you wouldn't.
Sure he would. Trump has allowed a certaiin group of people to release their inner bully/jack booted thug.
Because you know...MAGA
-
Not without probable cause you wouldn't.
@roamer_1
They had it with him. Of course they had to do their job.
-
According to liberals, "Global warming is BS," is crazy talk and you should be institutionalized.
Maybe have your guns taken away, too.
Didn't the FBI declare in an official governing document that Right Wing Conservatives were 'crazy' and labeled us Domestic Terror threats back in 2009?
I guess with Trump telling us that they can take guns first if the government declares you to be 'crazy' and we can worry about due process later, those of us who identify as Conservative are already identified as a group needing our guns taken away first by the government Trump now heads.
Just raise your right arms folks, salute and stop worrying about your rights and learn to love Trump.
-
Not without probable cause you wouldn't.
Like I said back in the day that is exactly how it would have gone down. No probable cause (other
than being bat shit crazy) and a week in a mental hospital for evaluation. Doctor says no guns,
presto no guns. I'll bet a clever sheriff could still do that today.
-
@roamer_1
They had it with him. Of course they had to do their job.
Then arrest him, run him through due process, and get him defined as crazy.
That still shouldn't allow them to confiscate the weapons, btw. Force the sale through relatives, perhaps, but they have no right to his equity.
-
Like I said back in the day that is exactly how it would have gone down. No probable cause (other
than being bat shit crazy) and a week in a mental hospital for evaluation. Doctor says no guns,
presto no guns. I'll bet a clever sheriff could still do that today.
Not around here.
-
Well I as sheriff, certainly would have taken Cruz's guns away from him.
Parents or legal guardians don't need probable cause or due process for a minor living under their roof. There was more than sufficient evidence that this kid living in their home was a dangerous troubled twisted soul.
-
You have a mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
I know it sounds logical on the face of it. But.... beneath the facade there's the threat to OUR liberty and 2nd Amendment rights. I keep thinking about how the Soviets dealt with their "dissidents". First, they declared them mentally unstable/insane. Disarming would have come next if they had been armed. Next came shipping the nuts off to Siberia....never heard from again.
We have those laws (constraints) for a reason. You do get that, don't you?
-
Trump repealed a bad EO that potentially took guns away from people under someone else’s care. They were deemed incapable of ownership because of physical or mental capacity. I guess ideas are only good or bad, depending on who has them.
-
Well I as sheriff, certainly would have taken Cruz's guns away from him.
Sounds like something Trump would say.
-
Am I the only one wondering if Trump is playing "whack the mole" with the Dims,by going on tv with people like Fineswine and agreeing with them that "there should be laws to prevent these people from getting guns,and there should be background checks!",getting them to all smile for the camera and attempt to kiss his ass?
Just imagine their joy at the thought of being able to brag that " President Trump is on our side,while your old white man congressman or Senator is glad school children were murdered by these evil weapons!"
I wonder how happy they will be if he holds a press conference in a week or so to announce he had been wrong because there are ALREADY laws on the books that would have disarmed Cruz IF THE LOCAL DIM OFFICIALS HAD FOLLOWED THE LAW instead of ignoring crime to get federal grant money?
He can then follow that up by naming the local sheriff and the local school board members,and cite the laws they ignored that allowed this to happen,stating that in essence the deaths were THEIR fault for allowing a mentally troubled youth they knew was armed to go free to shoot people?
Trump will have already been on record and broadast into homes all over America,even leftist strongholds that never report anything positive a Republican does,and people/voters who really don't normally pay much attention to politics until it's time to vote will be saying to themselves,"Self,Trump CLEARLY proved he was for public safety and keep guns out of the hands of criminals last week,and now we find it it was the fault of the local Dim politicians,not lax or non-existent gun laws!"
Trump will be on record as being FOR protecting the public by keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people,and he will be on tv saying how it was the Dims in Florida that keep EXISTING LAWS FROM BEING ENFORCED.
Suddenly,he looks like a statesman concerned with public safety,and has been on tv saying the laws are already in place and we don't need more laws.
Who are the voters going to believe then,the guy that was all for more gun control until he found out the exact laws he were proposing were already in place and being ignored,or the Dims,who will suddenly turn against him again?
NOT saying this WILL happen,but he's done similar things in the past. Don't forget,his whole business model is based around convincing people he is a buffoon they can ignore and dominate,and then at the end he ends up being the one that leaves with the money.
-
I know it sounds logical on the face of it. But.... beneath the facade there's the threat to OUR liberty and 2nd Amendment rights. I keep thinking about how the Soviets dealt with their "dissidents". First, they declared them mentally unstable/insane. Disarming would have come next if they had been armed. Next came shipping the nuts off to Siberia....never heard from again.
We have those laws (constraints) for a reason. You do get that, don't you?
He doesn't care because it's Trump doing it
-
Am I the only one wondering if Trump is playing "whack the mole" with the Dims,by going on tv with people like Fineswine and agreeing with them that "there should be laws to prevent these people from getting guns,and there should be background checks!",getting them to all smile for the camera and attempt to kiss his ass?
Just imagine their joy at the thought of being able to brag that " President Trump is on our side,while your old white man congressman or Senator is glad school children were murdered by these evil weapons!"
I wonder how happy they will be if he holds a press conference in a week or so to announce he had been wrong because there are ALREADY laws on the books that would have disarmed Cruz IF THE LOCAL DIM OFFICIALS HAD FOLLOWED THE LAW instead of ignoring crime to get federal grant money?
He can then follow that up by naming the local sheriff and the local school board members,and cite the laws they ignored that allowed this to happen,stating that in essence the deaths were THEIR fault for allowing a mentally troubled youth they knew was armed to go free to shoot people?
Trump will have already been on record and broadast into homes all over America,even leftist strongholds that never report anything positive a Republican does,and people/voters who really don't normally pay much attention to politics until it's time to vote will be saying to themselves,"Self,Trump CLEARLY proved he was for public safety and keep guns out of the hands of criminals last week,and now we find it it was the fault of the local Dim politicians,not lax or non-existent gun laws!"
Trump will be on record as being FOR protecting the public by keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people,and he will be on tv saying how it was the Dims in Florida that keep EXISTING LAWS FROM BEING ENFORCED.
Suddenly,he looks like a statesman concerned with public safety,and has been on tv saying the laws are already in place and we don't need more laws.
Who are the voters going to believe then,the guy that was all for more gun control until he found out the exact laws he were proposing were already in place and being ignored,or the Dims,who will suddenly turn against him again?
NOT saying this WILL happen,but he's done similar things in the past. Don't forget,his whole business model is based around convincing people he is a buffoon they can ignore and dominate,and then at the end he ends up being the one that leaves with the money.
Yes...you're the only one.
Next question.
-
Am I the only one wondering if Trump is playing "whack the mole" with the Dims,by going on tv with people like Fineswine and agreeing with them that "there should be laws to prevent these people from getting guns,and there should be background checks!",getting them to all smile for the camera and attempt to kiss his ass?
Just imagine their joy at the thought of being able to brag that " President Trump is on our side,while your old white man congressman or Senator is glad school children were murdered by these evil weapons!"
I wonder how happy they will be if he holds a press conference in a week or so to announce he had been wrong because there are ALREADY laws on the books that would have disarmed Cruz IF THE LOCAL DIM OFFICIALS HAD FOLLOWED THE LAW instead of ignoring crime to get federal grant money?
He can then follow that up by naming the local sheriff and the local school board members,and cite the laws they ignored that allowed this to happen,stating that in essence the deaths were THEIR fault for allowing a mentally troubled youth they knew was armed to go free to shoot people?
Trump will have already been on record and broadast into homes all over America,even leftist strongholds that never report anything positive a Republican does,and people/voters who really don't normally pay much attention to politics until it's time to vote will be saying to themselves,"Self,Trump CLEARLY proved he was for public safety and keep guns out of the hands of criminals last week,and now we find it it was the fault of the local Dim politicians,not lax or non-existent gun laws!"
Trump will be on record as being FOR protecting the public by keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people,and he will be on tv saying how it was the Dims in Florida that keep EXISTING LAWS FROM BEING ENFORCED.
Suddenly,he looks like a statesman concerned with public safety,and has been on tv saying the laws are already in place and we don't need more laws.
Who are the voters going to believe then,the guy that was all for more gun control until he found out the exact laws he were proposing were already in place and being ignored,or the Dims,who will suddenly turn against him again?
NOT saying this WILL happen,but he's done similar things in the past. Don't forget,his whole business model is based around convincing people he is a buffoon they can ignore and dominate,and then at the end he ends up being the one that leaves with the money.
This reads like a compilation of the FR thread on the same topic. Thirteen dimensional chess! The Art of the Deal! Whack a Mole! Bait and switch!
-
You have a mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
See Question 11f. of the NICS background check form.
-
@bolobaby he also needs to read #1 in your sig line.
Yall were ripping Trump a new one for proposing something that was fairly common up until the
late 60's early 70s. All I'm saying is it not some crazy idea Trump just pulled out of his butt.
I am also very much in favor of ending gun free zones. Gun free zones are really killing fields,
end them. And how about shooting instructions at schools, teach the snowflakes how to shoot
back. LOL, that would drive the Marxists Hogg wild.
-
He doesn't care because it's Trump doing it
If it's wrong (and it would be).... it shouldn't matter who is doing it or attempting to do it.
Trump jumped the shark on this one.... BIG time.
-
See Question 11f. of the NICS background check form.
You got me there. Is it "are you crazy?"
-
Man, it is soooooo disappointing that certain Trumpettes are hiding like cowards in the face of this news.
I need my Trumpsplaining, darn it!
-
Man, it is soooooo disappointing that certain Trumpettes are hiding like cowards in the face of this news.
I need my Trumpsplaining, darn it!
Hello, what am I chopped liver?
-
I need my Trumpsplaining, darn it!
YES! With interpretive dance!
-
Man, it is soooooo disappointing that certain Trumpettes are hiding like cowards in the face of this news.
I need my Trumpsplaining, darn it!
They're probabbly huddled together strategizing via PM on a unified response to Trumpsplain everything that's happened today.
-
Man, it is soooooo disappointing that certain Trumpettes are hiding like cowards in the face of this news.
I need my Trumpsplaining, darn it!
What exactly do you need explained? I do take time out of my day to assist drooling knuckle dragging shithooks and the underprivileged.
-
You got me there. Is it "are you crazy?"
Basically people of subnormal intelligence cannot purchase firearms, so your scenario of the "retard" should never happen because they are not allowed to purchase firearms.
-
Basically people of subnormal intelligence cannot purchase firearms....
But you were telling me the other day that you had a gun? What's going on here?
-
They're probabbly huddled together strategizing via PM on a unified response to Trumpsplain everything that's happened today.
Well.....you know how it goes. He can say all the crazy stuff about due process he wants. It’s not a problem until he actually violates it.
-
But you were telling me the other day that you had a gun? What's going on here?
You misunderstood, I said I had a gun in my pocket for you.
-
You misunderstood, I said I had a gun in my pocket for you.
Well people think I carry a concealed rifle in my front pocket.
-
Basically people of subnormal intelligence cannot purchase firearms, so your scenario of the "retard" should never happen because they are not allowed to purchase firearms.
Not all firearms are legally purchased and some times normal people flip out.
Used to be that if someone was crazy a friend, relative, neighbor could file a report, the cops
would come out and interview the subject. If the cops concluded the subject was crazy he/she
would be taken to a mental institution for evaluation. After x amount of time the subject would
appear before a judge and then anything could happen. See the movie Harvey for an example.
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBvpxzl54D8#)
-
You have a mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
Yes. Get the danged football away from POTUS ASAP.
-
Not all firearms are legally purchased and some times normal people flip out.
Used to be that if someone was crazy a friend, relative, neighbor could file a report, the cops
would come out and interview the subject. If the cops concluded the subject was crazy he/she
would be taken to a mental institution for evaluation. After x amount of time the subject would
appear before a judge and then anything could happen. See the movie Harvey for an example.
I think you're missing the point of your own question. You asked if a "retard" could have his guns taken away if he was making vague threats. The answer is yes, he shouldn't have them in the first place.
-
Well people think I carry a concealed rifle in my front pocket.
Is it because you walk with one knee locked?
-
No, you'll let THEM define crazy.
Only a crazy person would want to buy an AR15, therefore, you are labeled crazy and your purchase is denied... Goodnight.
-
Yes. Get the danged football away from POTUS ASAP.
The Chinese gave it a shot.
http://thehill.com/policy/international/china/374485-axios-us-and-chinese-officials-scuffled-in-beijing-over-nuclear (http://thehill.com/policy/international/china/374485-axios-us-and-chinese-officials-scuffled-in-beijing-over-nuclear)
-
Well people think I carry a concealed rifle in my front pocket.
@Frank Cannon @RoosGirl
Despite what Frank thinks a .22 short is not much of a rifle round.
-
Well.....you know how it goes. He can say all the crazy stuff about due process he wants. It’s not a problem until he actually violates it.
Think about it as eminent gun domain. The government needs your gun, therefore it will take it, for the good of soc iety. He has already shown through a long history he cares little for private property rights, so what's one more little piece of privately owned metal.
-
Yep Trump really gave it to us good this time didn't he?
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/a/a5/Trojan_horse.png/revision/latest?cb=20080929191521)
-
Trump has changed his mind (flip flopped) on quite a few issues. The AWB is just one of them.
Trump who was and still laughingly is touted as being a non politician, proved from the second he announced his candidacy to be the consummate politician doing and saying whatever people wanted to hear to advance himself. Right now he is happy to throw gun owners to the wolves to court the left, or to cover his butt from outrage over Parkland, even at TOS he has lost probably 50% of his defenders over his new or is it old position on guns.
-
Trump who was and still laughingly is touted as being a non politician, proved from the second he announced his candidacy to be the consummate politician doing and saying whatever people wanted to hear to advance himself. Right now he is happy to throw gun owners to the wolves to court the left, or to cover his butt from outrage over Parkland, even at TOS he has lost probably 50% of his defenders over his new or is it old position on guns.
He's been on the job for over a year now. I think he qualifies as a bonafide politician now. Only problem is.... he has a tendency to say stuff that alarms or pisses off half of the nation... and it is a very random thought process as to which side he pisses off at any given moment. I just don't think he thinks that much about what he says before he says it. Not bright at all, IOW.
-
So imagine this (nightmare) scenario. The left manages to forego/eliminate due process when it comes to disarming "potential" threats, such as teens like Cruz. What's to keep them from going a step further and disarming the parents of any 'troubled teen' that they have identified as a potential future "shooter"? After all, Lanza got his guns from his mother .... before he shot her. It would be open season on gun owners if this precedent (that Trump just presented) was allowed to become reality.
-
Not all firearms are legally purchased and some times normal people flip out.
Used to be that if someone was crazy a friend, relative, neighbor could file a report, the cops
would come out and interview the subject. If the cops concluded the subject was crazy he/she
would be taken to a mental institution for evaluation. After x amount of time the subject would
appear before a judge and then anything could happen. See the movie Harvey for an example.
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBvpxzl54D8#)
First of all the cops aren't qualified to ascertain or determine if someone is crazy, if they did they would have to lock up half their brethren. And it's sad that you think, like Trump that's OK to strip someone of their property/guns without due process because someone that may have grudge makes an accusation. We already have tons of laws(hyperbole, it's only pounds) of laws on the books to deal with guns and psychos. The problem, just like with immigration, is the failure of the schools, social services, law enforcement..........all the people, supposed professionals we pay to keep us safe to act on and enforce the law. And now foolish people think that more infringement of our rights and persecution of gun owners will eliminate the failures of the people that are supposed to protect us.
your very first sentence "Not all firearms are legally purchased " is the very proof that more laws and more restrictions on honest law abiding citizens are ridiculous. Just like wealthy liberals are more than welcome to pay more taxes if they want, you and those that think like you are more than welcome to restrict your own Second Amendment rights, just leave mine alone!
Oh and good move using a fantasy movie to prove your point(http://i61.tinypic.com/bdb35.jpg)
-
@GtHawk
You have a mildly mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
-
What exactly do you need explained? I do take time out of my day to assist drooling knuckle dragging shithooks and the underprivileged.
Do you still have to pay the hourly hookers you rented when you have to take a break to assist the drooling underprivileged shithooks? Or can they pause the meter for you?
I just don't see where you have any time with all your activities Frank.
Maybe you down some speed with your energy drink and blow? Make time slow down so you can fit it all in?
( I know you can make good on that tip-up)
-
hmmmmmm . . . .
-
Only a crazy person would want to buy an AR15, therefore, you are labeled crazy and your purchase is denied... Goodnight.
There it is. Show up with a Rebel or a Gadsen flag sticker in your back window, and you're a terrorist, end of story.
-
Paging @Right_in_Virginia , Paging @Right_in_Virginia ...
We're patiently awaiting the Trumpsplaining/comedy routine. Please don't leave us hanging!
Sorry to keep you waiting @bolobaby ... I just got home a little while ago. I watched this meeting through live streaming, and thought it was good and somewhat productive.
But when the President said "take the guns and then due process", I cringed. I knew he was on a "roll", but I don't have an explanation other than this is backwards. This will not be in the bill, but what I'm hoping for is a streamlined due process -- including a quicker route to a 72 hour visit to a mental health facility -- or the court challenges will render this moot. I'm also looking forward to a technical correction tweet.
-
Sorry to keep you waiting @bolobaby ... I just got home a little while ago. I watched this meeting through live streaming, and thought it was good and somewhat productive.
But when the President said "take the guns and then due process", I cringed. I knew he was on a "roll", but I don't have an explanation other than this is backwards. This will be in the bill, but what I'm hoping for is a streamlined due process or the court challenges will render this moot. I'm also looking forward to a technical correction tweet.
RIV, that's a response I can actually respect. Thank you.
-
I'm also looking forward to a technical correction tweet.
Since we all know by now Trump isn't the proper spokesman for the Trump administration.
-
Sorry to keep you waiting @bolobaby ... I just got home a little while ago. I watched this meeting through live streaming, and thought it was good and somewhat productive.
But when the President said "take the guns and then due process", I cringed. I knew he was on a "roll", but I don't have an explanation other than this is backwards. This will be in the bill, but what I'm hoping for is a streamlined due process -- including a quicker route to a 72 hour visit to a mental health facility -- or the court challenges will render this moot. I'm also looking forward to a technical correction tweet.
I watched it too and almost fell out of my chair....not good at all..
I thought there would be a correction by now..the longer he waits the worse it will be for him...
-
I watched it too and almost fell out of my chair....not good at all..
I thought there would be a correction by now..the longer he waits the worse it will be for him...
One step forward..... two steps back. (the pattern)
-
Since we all know by now Trump isn't the proper spokesman for the Trump administration.
I am not part of that "we" @Meldrew
-
I watched it too and almost fell out of my chair....not good at all..
I thought there would be a correction by now..the longer he waits the worse it will be for him...
@mystery-ak
Hopefully in the morning ...
But I don't think the tweet will stop the media on this. As I said, I've been out and haven't seen the news .... and I think I'll pass on it tonight. ^-^
-
@GtHawk
You have a mildly mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
Here's the problem, you keep dancing around this, it's not that he shouldn't have been taken in for evaluation, it's not that psychological experts wouldn't have found him at least temporarily incapacitated hell he called the cops himself after his mother died looking for help, it's that we already have all these laws and procedures in place and they weren't followed by the people that were hired or elected to follow and implement them. Bypassing due process, violating a persons rights as Trump stated and seems to desire, adding more laws and burdens on the honest sane citizen won't do dick if the laws we already have aren't followed.
People that are happy to take something of value from another, just because they themselves don't hold it in the same value, often excuse it as "the common sense thing to do", for the persons own good, for the public good or my favorite reason of the liberal "FOR THE CHILDREN".
So that in a nutshell is my problem with the common sense gun grabbing, rights violating, knee jerk response to tragedies like this. If the laws, policies and procedures that we already have passed were followed 17 lives would not have been lost and dozens of lives would not have been ruined. More laws are not what we need, all we need is for people to do their damn jobs and follow the existing laws and policies.
-
I am not part of that "we" @Meldrew
Obviously.
-
Here's the problem, you keep dancing around this, it's not that he shouldn't have been taken in for evaluation, it's not that psychological experts wouldn't have found him at least temporarily incapacitated hell he called the cops himself after his mother died looking for help, it's that we already have all these laws and procedures in place and they weren't followed by the people that were hired or elected to follow and implement them. Bypassing due process, violating a persons rights as Trump stated and seems to desire, adding more laws and burdens on the honest sane citizen won't do dick if the laws we already have aren't followed.
People that are happy to take something of value from another, just because they themselves don't hold it in the same value, often excuse it as "the common sense thing to do", for the persons own good, for the public good or my favorite reason of the liberal "FOR THE CHILDREN".
So that in a nutshell is my problem with the common sense gun grabbing, rights violating, knee jerk response to tragedies like this. If the laws, policies and procedures that we already have passed were followed 17 lives would not have been lost and dozens of lives would not have been ruined. More laws are not what we need, all we need is for people to do their damn jobs and follow the existing laws and policies.
If.... big word, big concept there. If we didn't have the radical left 'effing' things up in America quite intentionally.... like the Obama/Holder "Promise Program" which they instigated.... that kept Cruz (and other mentally ill thugs) from being arrested and summarily kept from committing mass murder..... those laws already enacted would be working fine. But when government keeps selective and certain laws from being followed, you have chaos and anarchy. Just as they fully intended.
-
Obviously.
So why post that to me? @Meldrew
-
@GtHawk
You have a mildly mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
Again with the mentally retarded thing. What is with you? Are you so hung up on not being able to admit that POTUS is wrong on this that you have to come with some hyperbolic scenario just to cope? POTUS is wrong on this; there's no weird scenario where it's okay to confiscate property prior to judgement.
-
One step forward..... two steps back. (the pattern)
It's just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right.
-
It's just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right.
It's . . .
Charles Durning, "Dance a Little Side Step" (from The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas)
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Emc1M5F9I-E#)
-
POTUS is wrong on this; there's no weird scenario where it's okay to confiscate property prior to judgement.
Not to mention the crap you have to go through to get your property BACK, if it is determined they were wrong.
-
@Right_in_Virginia Cuz I quoted your post?
But please, don't let me be a distraction. Carry on.
-
I can't speak for @Meldrew, @Right_in_Virginia but you do have a tendency to trigger some of US Briefers, just cause it's what you do, BEST, and I also think you do it maliciously with intent to harm and I love you for that, and that only.
-
If.... big word, big concept there. If we didn't have the radical left 'effing' things up in America quite intentionally.... like the Obama/Holder "Promise Program" which they instigated.... that kept Cruz (and other mentally ill thugs) from being arrested and summarily kept from committing mass murder..... those laws already enacted would be working fine. But when government keeps selective and certain laws from being followed, you have chaos and anarchy. Just as they fully intended.
So taking all those little examples of yours and using them myself, more infringements won't make a damn bit of difference, now will they? We won't, the children won't, be one damn bit safer than they are now.
-
It's just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right.
It's just Trump tap-dancing down Jackass Lane. :rolling:
-
Did the thought police just murder 17 8th graders in Fla while wounding 14 more?
OTOH, the real police waited outside the school.
-
It's just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right.
A time warp all the way off the Left Cliff to Stalin's Soviet.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/04/11/01/2771A10D00000578-3034493-image-m-43_1428712807992.jpg)
-
So taking all those little examples of yours and using them myself, more infringements won't make a damn bit of difference, now will they? We won't, the children won't, be one damn bit safer than they are now.
Of course not. But then.... our safety isn't the issue. The radical left's main concern is control over us. You know that. Right?
-
Again with the mentally retarded thing. What is with you? Are you so hung up on not being able to admit that POTUS is wrong on this that you have to come with some hyperbolic scenario just to cope? POTUS is wrong on this; there's no weird scenario where it's okay to confiscate property prior to judgement.
I just took at as projection on JPSB's part, what else do they have, I mean the whole argument they put up is so weak that it's funny in a sad pathetic kind of way. But you know it's like Trump, if you just attack maybe they'll forget how wrong you are.
-
Of course not. But then.... our safety isn't the issue. The radical left's main concern is control over us. You know that. Right?
you realize we are in agreement, right?
-
you realize we are in agreement, right?
Yeah.... that's what I thought at first.... but then you posted something that made me unsure....lol.
:beer:
-
Yeah.... that's what I thought at first.... but then you posted something that made me unsure....lol.
:beer:
@XenaLee
Sorry about that, unsure is the state I live in nowadays.
(http://i42.tinypic.com/21nob5e.jpg)
-
More Trump Gun Betrayal: “Take the Guns Firstâ€
Posted at 5:30 pm on February 28, 2018 by Susan Wright
Then, Trump chimed in, in response, and this is what should have clear-headed, true patriots clutching their pocket Constitutions a little tighter tonight:
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,†Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,†Trump said.
https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/ (https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/)
9999what 9999what
I am not sure that our President is capable of the job.
-
@XenaLee
Sorry about that, unsure is the state I live in nowadays.
(http://i42.tinypic.com/21nob5e.jpg)
Lol! I can definitely relate.
-
I am not sure that our President is capable of the job.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXJwUjtXkAA4xTm.jpg)
Woke Romney @MoMoneyMitt
15 hours ago
LOL @NRA you gave this guy $30 million and now he’s punking you on live TV! Losers.
-
Again with the mentally retarded thing. What is with you? Are you so hung up on not being able to admit that POTUS is wrong on this that you have to come with some hyperbolic scenario just to cope? POTUS is wrong on this; there's no weird scenario where it's okay to confiscate property prior to judgement.
I am just describing the Fla shooter whom everyone agrees should not have been allowed to have
fire arms in his procession. There should be and used to be a means to prevents the Cruz's from
carrying out crimes. They were not charges with a crime there were sent to a metal institution for
evaluation. They did not have access to their weapons and thus could not shoot up anything.
After being evaluated they when before a judge. The judge could to anything from releasing them
to committing them. In Cruz's case, as a hypothetical, the judge could have released him under
the condition that he sold, transferred or surrendered his guns.
Were there abuses? Yes however we had far fewer mass killings back then. Today we have mass
killings every few months. You are crazy if you think these mass killing will not provoke a big
reaction from the voting public that cares little about the second.
If there are reasons to believe someone is bat shit crazy, put them in a mental institution for
evaluation. Bat shit crazies should not be allowed to shoot up 8th graders at a local school. And
yes arm teachers that are trained and wish to be armed. End gun free zones.
FYI, I joined the NRA for the first time earlier this week, prior I was gun owners of American
member so I am hardly a gun grabber.
-
I am just describing the Fla shooter whom everyone agrees should not have been allowed to have fire arms in his procession.
That's going to make Trump's parade in November kind of boring.
-
I am just describing the Fla shooter whom everyone agrees should not have been allowed to have
fire arms in his procession. There should be and used to be a means to prevents the Cruz's from
carrying out crimes. They were not charges with a crime there were sent to a metal institution for
evaluation. They did not have access to their weapons and thus could not shoot up anything.
After being evaluated they when before a judge. The judge could to anything from releasing them
to committing them. In Cruz's case, as a hypothetical, the judge could have released him under
the condition that he sold, transferred or surrendered his guns.
Were there abuses? Yes however we had far fewer mass killings back then. Today we have mass
killings every few months. You are crazy if you think these mass killing will not provoke a big
reaction from the voting public that cares little about the second.
If there are reasons to believe someone is bat shit crazy, put them in a mental institution for
evaluation. Bat shit crazies should not be allowed to shoot up 8th graders at a local school. And
yes arm teachers that are trained and wish to be armed. End gun free zones.
FYI, I joined the NRA for the first time earlier this week, prior I was gun owners of American
member so I am hardly a gun grabber.
I've haven't seen any articles that describe him as being of below normal intelligence.
-
I've haven't seen any articles that describe him as being of below normal intelligence.
The point is, he was bat shit crazy! He was described as having the mental capacity of a twelve year
old. However that is immaterial. He was bat shit crazy. Most of these shooter are. I'd include the
LV shooter, but all the details about that shooting have gone into an FBI built back hole.
-
Sorry to keep you waiting @bolobaby ... I just got home a little while ago. I watched this meeting through live streaming, and thought it was good and somewhat productive.
But when the President said "take the guns and then due process", I cringed. I knew he was on a "roll", but I don't have an explanation other than this is backwards. This will not be in the bill, but what I'm hoping for is a streamlined due process -- including a quicker route to a 72 hour visit to a mental health facility -- or the court challenges will render this moot. I'm also looking forward to a technical correction tweet.
Even the NRA can find room for the discussion and compromise on the age 21 requirement or even bump stocks. But take the guns first then go to court? HELL NO.
-
One thing this has done is brought out their real goal. Banning of firearms.
-
There's a six page, active thread on this here: http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,306029.0.html (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,306029.0.html)
@Machiavelli
@mystery-ak
-
More Trump Gun Betrayal: “Take the Guns Firstâ€
Posted at 5:30 pm on February 28, 2018 by Susan Wright
Then, Trump chimed in, in response, and this is what should have clear-headed, true patriots clutching their pocket Constitutions a little tighter tonight:
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,†Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,†Trump said.
https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/ (https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/)
9999what 9999what
I am not sure that our President is capable of the job.
As time goes on, Trump is becoming more and more liberal. Most of us saw this coming! I can only imagine he will lean more left if we lose either House in the mid terms and certainly we will see the real liberal Trump if he's elected to his 2nd term!
-
One thing this has done is brought out their real goal. Banning of firearms.
And it could be the word "their" includes Trump.
-
Donald J. Trumpâ€ï€²Verified accountï‚™
@realDonaldTrump
It was an honor to welcome bipartisan members of Congress for a discussion on SAFE schools and SAFE communities. As we continue to mourn the loss of so many precious young lives in Parkland, we are determined to turn our grief into action. Full meeting: http://45.wh.gov/BipartisanMtg (http://45.wh.gov/BipartisanMtg)
1:34 PM - 28 Feb 2018
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/968962582374621185?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/968962582374621185?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet)
Donald J. Trumpâ€ï€²Verified accountï‚™
@realDonaldTrump
Many ideas, some good & some not so good, emerged from our bipartisan meeting on school safety yesterday at the White House. Background Checks a big part of conversation. Gun free zones are proven targets of killers. After many years, a Bill should emerge. Respect 2nd Amendment!
3:53 AM - 1 Mar 2018
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969178931369783296?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969178931369783296?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet)
-
I've haven't seen any articles that describe him as being of below normal intelligence.
He may have had some issues, due to the alleged drug activity of his birth mother.........
Alleged school shooter’s mom paid $50K to adopt him from ‘drug addict’
Mom Lynda Cruz paid $50,000 to adopt alleged school shooter Nikolas Cruz from his “drug addict†biological mother when he was just 3 days old, and then dropped another $15,000 on his younger half-brother, Zachary, when she found out the troubled mom was pregnant again, according to a report.
“Nik’s biological mother was just a complete screw-up, drug addict and thief,†former friend and neighbor Trish Duvaney told RadarOnline.
“I even said to Lynda: ‘You don’t know the mother’s background.’ Both children were born after one-night stands. The birth mother, she didn’t even really know who the two biological fathers were.â€
https://nypost.com/2018/02/27/alleged-school-shooters-mom-paid-50k-to-adopt-him-from-drug-addict/
-
And it could be the word "their" includes Trump.
:facepalm2:
-
Donald J. Trumpâ€ï€²Verified accountï‚™
@realDonaldTrump
Many ideas, some good & some not so good, emerged from our bipartisan meeting on school safety yesterday at the White House. Background Checks a big part of conversation. Gun free zones are proven targets of killers. After many years, a Bill should emerge. Respect 2nd Amendment!
3:53 AM - 1 Mar 2018
He could include respecting the 4th Amendment as well. Not doing it was one of the not so good ideas.
-
He was referring to obvious and clear nutcases who have threatened people with weapons and who obviously have a potential for immediate danger to themselves and others. Not the general public.
This kid in FL should have had his guns taken away first. He clearly stated his desire and intent to hurt people with them.
BTW, the kid actually expected his guns to be confiscated. He buried a 'backup' stash of weapons in his backyard. So, even he thought that is what the Cops were going to do.
-
The point is, he was bat shit crazy! He was described as having the mental capacity of a twelve year
old. However that is immaterial. He was bat shit crazy. Most of these shooter are. I'd include the
LV shooter, but all the details about that shooting have gone into an FBI built back hole.
He was described by the person that called the FBI that he has the mental capacity of a 12 to 14 year old. That does not mean he's "retarded". And that fact alone does not make him bat shit crazy. He had been in treatment at at least one mental health facility. None of that means any of his possessions should be taken without due process.
-
He may have had some issues, due to the alleged drug activity of his birth mother.........
Alleged school shooter’s mom paid $50K to adopt him from ‘drug addict’
Mom Lynda Cruz paid $50,000 to adopt alleged school shooter Nikolas Cruz from his “drug addict†biological mother when he was just 3 days old, and then dropped another $15,000 on his younger half-brother, Zachary, when she found out the troubled mom was pregnant again, according to a report.
“Nik’s biological mother was just a complete screw-up, drug addict and thief,†former friend and neighbor Trish Duvaney told RadarOnline.
“I even said to Lynda: ‘You don’t know the mother’s background.’ Both children were born after one-night stands. The birth mother, she didn’t even really know who the two biological fathers were.â€
https://nypost.com/2018/02/27/alleged-school-shooters-mom-paid-50k-to-adopt-him-from-drug-addict/
You know, When I saw the kids picture I said to myself, Self, that there is a crackhead baby.
-
:facepalm2:
Scoff all you like, but absent a reasonable follow-up explanation from the White House, Trump has once again demonstrated no regard for the Constitution. This should trouble his supporters -- unless they too think the Constitution can be disregarded whenever it is convenient to do so. In that case, maybe Trump and his supporters should just drop any pretense of conservatism and simply become Democrats.
-
@GtHawk
You have a mildly mentally retarded, emotionally distressed person making vague threats (not
actionable) to shoot something up. And he has the means to shoot something up. What would
you do? Would you be opposed to taking his firearms from him? Until it can be determined if he
really is a threat to himself and others?
Not an ideal solution with plenty of room for abuse, but it does seem like a common sense thing
to do.
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
Which does this make Trump, "mentally retarded" or emotionally distressed?
-
There it is. Show up with a Rebel or a Gadsen flag sticker in your back window, and you're a terrorist, end of story.
yep, Just saying the word "Texas" can freak out some people.
-
Scoff all you like, but absent a reasonable follow-up explanation from the White House, Trump has once again demonstrated no regard for the Constitution. This should trouble his supporters -- unless they too think the Constitution can be disregarded whenever it is convenient to do so. In that case, maybe Trump and his supporters should just drop any pretense of conservatism and simply become Democrats.
@Applewood you have to understand that hard core Trump followers support his any means necessary attitude...even at the expense of the Constitution.
Things that they would be appalled if Obama or Hillary tried to do or even hinted at become perfectly acceptable and logical because it's "their guy".
No amount of logical reasoning or explanation will ever get through the orange bubble they live in. There will always be an excuse in their head as to why doing the unthinkable at any other time is just dandy now.
-
yep, Just saying the word "Texas" can freak out some people.
Not sure why people are so scared of us...we're a really loveable bunch :)
-
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
Which does this make Trump, "mentally retarded" or emotionally distressed?
Quick! Somebody take Trump's guns without due process! He threatening to shoot someone on 5th Ave!
-
Not sure why people are so scared of us...we're a really loveable bunch :)
I hear ya,We're quite friendly!
-
Not sure why people are so scared of us...we're a really loveable bunch :)
I married a Yankee. When up there, just saying I am from Texas draws a crowd. At gatherings, kind of like being at the zoo exhibition. And yes about a 1/3 of the time they ask how many guns that I own. They are always surprised that mine were lost in a boating incident.
-
Not sure why people are so scared of us...we're a really loveable bunch :)
(http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/2900000/Vietnam-forrest-gump-2980585-720-304.jpg)
There was Dallas, from Phoenix; Cleveland - he was from Detroit; and Tex... well, I don't remember where Tex come from.
-
Not sure why people are so scared of us...we're a really loveable bunch :)
Just big ole cuddly Teddy Bears, by Gawd!
-
@XenaLee
Sorry about that, unsure is the state I live in nowadays.
(http://i42.tinypic.com/21nob5e.jpg)
@GtHawk
Looks like you have your finger of the problem,anyhow. :smokin:
-
More Trump Gun Betrayal: “Take the Guns Firstâ€
Posted at 5:30 pm on February 28, 2018 by Susan Wright
Then, Trump chimed in, in response, and this is what should have clear-headed, true patriots clutching their pocket Constitutions a little tighter tonight:
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time,†Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,†Trump said.
https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/ (https://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2018/02/28/trump-gun-betrayal-take-guns-first/)
9999what 9999what
I am not sure that our President is capable of the job.
@Chosen Daughter
You will never be sure. Nothing can make you sure. If he were to the right of Barry Goldwater you wouldn't like him.
SANE people realize what he was saying was "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them until such time as they have been given a clean bill of health. You do NOT wait until they carry out the mass murders they have been saying they want to commit,and THEN take their weapons away from them.
And it should NOT need to be said that when the cops pick someone up and take them to a mental ward for evaluation,they do not have access to their weapons.
WHY is common sense so uncommon these days?
-
@Chosen Daughter
You will never be sure. Nothing can make you sure. If he were to the right of Barry Goldwater you wouldn't like him.
SANE people realize what he was saying was "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them until such time as they have been given a clean bill of health. You do NOT wait until they carry out the mass murders they have been saying they want to commit,and THEN take their weapons away from them.
And it should NOT need to be said that when the cops pick someone up and take them to a mental ward for evaluation,they do not have access to their weapons.
WHY is common sense so uncommon these days?
So you have a Mr Social Justice Warrior, let's call him David. Well David really hates gun owners. He sees many comments on local news articles by a man named Pete defending the NRA and gun ownership. So David decides to take action. He and his friends call their local police chief (good old progressive guy too) over and over making accusations that Pete is mentally unstable. They don't really know Pete or if be really is, but in their mind, anyone who thinks like Pete is a danger to society.
So Mr police Chief, listening to David and his friends, confiscate all of Pete's guns with zero due process and very little recourse.
This isn't crazy, it already happens with parents having children removed by CPS for the parents beliefs. It ilso is how SJWs stifle speech on social media.
-
@Chosen Daughter
You will never be sure. Nothing can make you sure. If he were to the right of Barry Goldwater you wouldn't like him.
SANE people realize what he was saying was "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them until such time as they have been given a clean bill of health. You do NOT wait until they carry out the mass murders they have been saying they want to commit,and THEN take their weapons away from them.
And it should NOT need to be said that when the cops pick someone up and take them to a mental ward for evaluation,they do not have access to their weapons.
WHY is common sense so uncommon these days?
You believe authorities should be allowed to take all weapons if "someone" reports them to be crazy?
Guilty until proven innocent without investigation?
Or do I misunderstand you?
-
@Chosen Daughter
You will never be sure. Nothing can make you sure. If he were to the right of Barry Goldwater you wouldn't like him.
SANE people realize what he was saying was "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them until such time as they have been given a clean bill of health. You do NOT wait until they carry out the mass murders they have been saying they want to commit,and THEN take their weapons away from them.
And it should NOT need to be said that when the cops pick someone up and take them to a mental ward for evaluation,they do not have access to their weapons.
WHY is common sense so uncommon these days?
goopo
This was a discussion, not a policy statement per that meeting yesterday.
-
goopo
This was a discussion, not a policy statement per that meeting yesterday.
Sad and yet totally predictable you'd have this attitude towards Trump making that kind of statement...but would be in a hand wringing hysterical panic if Hillary or Obama had said the same thing.
-
Am I the only one wondering if Trump is playing "whack the mole" with the Dims,by going on tv with people like Fineswine and agreeing with them that "there should be laws to prevent these people from getting guns,and there should be background checks!",getting them to all smile for the camera and attempt to kiss his ass?
Just imagine their joy at the thought of being able to brag that " President Trump is on our side,while your old white man congressman or Senator is glad school children were murdered by these evil weapons!"
I wonder how happy they will be if he holds a press conference in a week or so to announce he had been wrong because there are ALREADY laws on the books that would have disarmed Cruz IF THE LOCAL DIM OFFICIALS HAD FOLLOWED THE LAW instead of ignoring crime to get federal grant money?
He can then follow that up by naming the local sheriff and the local school board members,and cite the laws they ignored that allowed this to happen,stating that in essence the deaths were THEIR fault for allowing a mentally troubled youth they knew was armed to go free to shoot people?
Trump will have already been on record and broadast into homes all over America,even leftist strongholds that never report anything positive a Republican does,and people/voters who really don't normally pay much attention to politics until it's time to vote will be saying to themselves,"Self,Trump CLEARLY proved he was for public safety and keep guns out of the hands of criminals last week,and now we find it it was the fault of the local Dim politicians,not lax or non-existent gun laws!"
Trump will be on record as being FOR protecting the public by keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people,and he will be on tv saying how it was the Dims in Florida that keep EXISTING LAWS FROM BEING ENFORCED.
Suddenly,he looks like a statesman concerned with public safety,and has been on tv saying the laws are already in place and we don't need more laws.
Who are the voters going to believe then,the guy that was all for more gun control until he found out the exact laws he were proposing were already in place and being ignored,or the Dims,who will suddenly turn against him again?
NOT saying this WILL happen,but he's done similar things in the past. Don't forget,his whole business model is based around convincing people he is a buffoon they can ignore and dominate,and then at the end he ends up being the one that leaves with the money.
Astute observation. This is exactly how President Trump has rolled so far. When he says stuff like this he’s usually maneuvering his opponents. It’s a thing of beauty.
-
@Chosen Daughter
You will never be sure. Nothing can make you sure. If he were to the right of Barry Goldwater you wouldn't like him.
SANE people realize what he was saying was "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them until such time as they have been given a clean bill of health. You do NOT wait until they carry out the mass murders they have been saying they want to commit,and THEN take their weapons away from them.
And it should NOT need to be said that when the cops pick someone up and take them to a mental ward for evaluation,they do not have access to their weapons.
WHY is common sense so uncommon these days?
Of course that is what he was saying. But the kneejerk people here won't listen to reason. They'll just dismiss common sense by saying that you are a crazy Trump supporter, who will support him no matter what.
That kid in FL should have had his guns confiscated and he should have been locked up for evaluation. Anyone who can't see that is delusional and probably is a member of Alex Jones' website.
-
Of course that is what he was saying. But the kneejerk people here won't listen to reason. They'll just dismiss common sense by saying that you are a crazy Trump supporter, who will support him no matter what.
That kid in FL should have had his guns confiscated and he should have been locked up for evaluation. Anyone who can't see that is delusional and probably is a member of Alex Jones' website.
And what about that thing called the 4th Amendment?
-
Astute observation. This is exactly how President Trump has rolled so far. When he says stuff like this he’s usually maneuvering his opponents. It’s a thing of beauty.
Any excuse to cover for your boy huh? **nononono*
-
Sad and yet totally predictable you'd have this attitude towards Trump making that kind of statement...but would be in a hand wringing hysterical panic if Hillary or Obama had said the same thing.
I think it comes down to our being a tribal species. The chief of the tribe must be protected from all enemies, real or perceived. And you are correct. If a president Hillary or President Obama made this exact same statement, we all would be up in arms and there would be no spin of what they “really meant to say†at least from conservative circles
He needs to come out and clear this up, ASAP
-
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters."
Which does this make Trump, "mentally retarded" or emotionally distressed?
3 Core Facets of Narcissism, from Malignant to Adaptive
New research provides insights into narcissism’s complex features.
Posted Feb 27, 2018 Susan Krauss Whitbourne Ph.D.
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,306096.0.html (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,306096.0.html)
-
SANE people realize what he was saying was "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them until such time as they have been given a clean bill of health. Y
Yes...this was exactly what the Soviets used so effectively in maintaining tyranny.
WHY is common sense so uncommon these days?
I don't know. Perhaps because so few know history or the Constitution, so they think things like due process are mere niceties, to fall by the wayside until the government decides the citizens may have their rights back.
-
goopo
This was a discussion, not a policy statement per that meeting yesterday.
Yes, but it was a discussion of something he believes was a good idea and should be implemented. Who gets to be the arbiter of what is ‘crazy’ and when you are ‘well enough’ to receive your weapons back? All we have done since the election is talk about FIFA abuse by the government. Now we want to give them more power to abuse the fourth amendment?
Come on.
-
Yes...this was exactly what the Soviets used so effectively in maintaining tyranny.
IIRC...FDR did the same thing...St. Elizabeth's in DC was used for basically the same purpose.
-
He needs to come out and clear this up, ASAP
@LMAO but if he follows his normal habits...he'll see the shock outrage and criticism of what he said and double down on it.
-
I really had high hopes for Trump after the Gorsuch nomination, Now Not so much.
-
Doesn't matter. Without specific actions showing specific intent, it is thought police. Be very careful how far down that slippery slope you go.
Well this just made the day of my Libtard relatives.
-
I really had high hopes for Trump after the Gorsuch nomination, Now Not so much.
No, no, no.....you don’t get it. He can say all the silly, dangerous, and unconstitutional things he wants. It’s only the end result bill that matters. That’s the dug in Alamo position of his most faithful. He could have said Garland was a great guy and would have made a terrific SC Justice, but what matters is he appointed Gorsuch. *****rollingeyes*****
-
Well this just made the day of my Libtard relatives.
Yeah, no kidding. Ah, what the hell... We didn't really need that whole Rule of Law thing anyway.
-
Rush is opening his program with Trumpsplaining, of course.
-
Rush is opening his program with Trumpsplaining, of course.
**nononono*
-
Rush is opening his program with Trumpsplaining, of course.
Let him 'splain this, then:
Charles C. W. Cooke†(https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/status/968986015036854273)
@charlescwcooke
Forget that it’s guns, and substitute any other
item into the sentence, legal or illegal. This is
an open call for lawbreaking by the
authorities. The good argument is to change
the law so the police had options. This is not
that argument.
-
Of course that is what he was saying. But the kneejerk people here won't listen to reason. They'll just dismiss common sense by saying that you are a crazy Trump supporter, who will support him no matter what.
That kid in FL should have had his guns confiscated and he should have been locked up for evaluation. Anyone who can't see that is delusional and probably is a member of Alex Jones' website.
And who here ever said that they believed the kid was just fine and shouldn't have been evaluated for possible confiscation of his firearms? Some of you seem to have a problem distinguishing between just taking people's gun because someone said they might do something, and following a proper procedure where someone with authority and understanding of the law (with respect to the Constitution) and all the facts of the matter and passing a legal judgement as to whether they pose a possible threat and need further evaluation including temporarily relieving them of their firearms or other weapons and remanding them to a mental health facility. The latter of these two scenarios is guaranteed within the Constitution.
-
One thing this has done is brought out their real goal. Banning of firearms.
YUP. They are coming out of hiding to make it a movement now:
It's Time For Gun Abolition. We Need To Ban All Civilian Guns (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php?topic=306071.0;topicseen)
-
If anyone watched that CNN townhall with Scott Israel saying 'Baker Act' every five minutes, you'd have serious concerns about allowing someone like him to expand their powers.
-
Astute observation. This is exactly how President Trump has rolled so far. When he says stuff like this he’s usually maneuvering his opponents. It’s a thing of beauty.
You goose-step more rigidly and higher for your leader than the Sturmabteilung at a Nuremberg rally in the 30s.
-
You goose-step more rigidly and higher for your leader than the Sturmabteilung at a Nuremberg rally in the 30s.
@INVAR
Before this gets deleted, I want to say that's about the best description I've seen.
-
If anyone watched that CNN townhall with Scott Israel saying 'Baker Act' every five minutes, you'd have serious concerns about allowing someone like him to expand their powers.
Did he point out that the Baker Act criteria weren't really likely met in this case?
-
Did he point out that the Baker Act criteria weren't really likely met in this case?
Yes and he wanted it expanded to make it fit. Worst of all, he wants it to include immediate seizure of weapons and a return after an unspecified 'rehabilitation' time period.
It was almost like a Bill Ayers dream of re-education camps.
-
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/376097-trump-take-the-guns-first-go-through-due-process-second)
“I like taking the guns early like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida ... to go to court would have taken a long time,†Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence. “Take the guns first, go through due process second,†Trump said.
@driftdiver
@mystery-ak
@txradioguy
I watched him say these things. He thinks because he is president, he owns the country and can do whatever he wants, make people do what he wants, just as he did his company. He is too dense to be president, cannot read documents, has someone read to him. Jared Kushner did this for him every morning, so did Hope Hicks. Jared no longer can see top secret material, and Hicks is leaving. I can read fast, can you? If so, apply for the job of "reader".
He thinks he can take people's guns because he is president - thinks he owns the country, and that means the people IN the country. He thinks he can tell you what you can and cannot do, and take away anything you own. He is a dictator and if it were not for the constitution, which he has never read, he would control the country and you.
I have thought from the beginning, he may have a nervous breakdown if he thinks he isn't being given enough "credit", and right now he is more isolated than he has been, so this may add the final pressure, the final flap of the butterfly wings, that brings on a breakdown. In my opinion, right now, he wants to break out and do something spectacular to give him "credit", and that may be attacking North Korea. When his labels of people, "Little Kim", "Mr. McGoo Sessions", etc., don't satisfy him anymore, war will.
-
@driftdiver
@mystery-ak
@txradioguy
I watched him say these things. He thinks because he is president, he owns the country and can do whatever he wants, make people do what he wants, just as he did his company. He is too dense to be president, cannot read documents, has someone read to him. Jared Kushner did this for him every morning, so did Hope Hicks. Jared no longer can see top secret material, and Hicks is leaving. I can read fast, can you? If so, apply for the job of "reader".
He thinks he can take people's guns because he is president - thinks he owns the country, and that means the people IN the country. He thinks he can tell you what you can and cannot do, and take away anything you own. He is a dictator and if it were not for the constitution, which he has never read, he would control the country and you.
I have thought from the beginning, he may have a nervous breakdown if he thinks he isn't being given enough "credit", and right now he is more isolated than he has been, so this may add the final pressure, the final flap of the butterfly wings, that brings on a breakdown. In my opinion, right now, he wants to break out and do something spectacular to give him "credit", and that may be attacking North Korea. When his labels of people, "Little Kim", "Mr. McGoo Sessions", etc., don't satisfy him anymore, war will.
@Victoria33
I think you're letting your dislike for him as a person color your judgement.
-
@INVAR
Before this gets deleted, I want to say that's about the best description I've seen.
I had to describe it in a word picture because some snowflakes cannot handle seeing a historical image that depict a similar mindset of lockstep fever to a man who they see as national savior.
-
@Victoria33
I think you're letting your dislike for him as a person color your judgement.
@driftdriver
No, I evaluate his "behavior". That was my job for over twenty years, evaluating behavior. His behavior tells me he likely has a personality disorder, along with a learning disability. Numerous mental professionals also believe this, due to his behavior that fits certain mental disorders. It is my opinion, he should not be president due to this. Also, due to this, he may not be president for his whole term.
-
Any excuse to cover for your boy huh? **nononono*
Well, when I find a president I like I stick with him. I don’t go off half cocked every time he throws out a shiny object with which to blind his political opponents. As a supporter of the NRA, I trust him enough not to take any action that would infringe on 2A. That’s how confident I am in his respect for the constitution.
-
...Besides I’ve been right about Donald Trump nearly every time and you have been wrong about Donald Trump nearly every time. I think I have the better track record.
-
I think this was a gaffe of monumental proportions. I mean that in the sense, "Accidentally told the truth about what's really on his mind." Let's watch him try to walk it back without looking like he's walking it back.
-
Well, when I find a president I like I stick with him. I don’t go off half cocked every time he throws out a shiny object with which to blind his political opponents. As a supporter of the NRA, I trust him enough not to take any action that would infringe on 2A. That’s how confident I am in his respect for the constitution.
Where was his respect for the Constitution when he stated yesterday he was totally willing to toss away the 4th Amendment rights of that kid in Florida or anyone else for that matter? "Seize the guns first worry about due process second".
Again had that been Obama or Hillary you'd be raging mad at the blatant disregard for the Constitution.
But since it's your boy...it makes everything ok. That kind of cult mentality is frightening.
You're delusional in your blind faith. But hey I guess everyone has to learn the hard way at some point. This musts be your time.
-
...Besides I’ve been right about Donald Trump nearly every time and you have been wrong about Donald Trump nearly every time. I think I have the better track record.
Riiiight. Sure you have.
How's that prosecution of Hillary coming along? You enjoying that complete repeal of Obamacare on day one of his term yet?
Do we have the funds from Mexico yet to build the border wall?
-
Riiiight. Sure you have.
How's that prosecution of Hillary coming along? You enjoying that complete repeal of Obamacare on day one of his term yet?
Do we have the funds from Mexico yet to build the border wall?
Nobody is going to mistake me for a Trump fan. I’ll criticize the hell out of him, but I’ll never go this far to actively oppose him, unless he truly does something unmistakably impeachable.
From yesterday.......
â€I’m absolutist on Trump,†Kristol told me. “He shouldn’t be president. We should limit the damage he can do as president. And we should try as hard as we can to prevent him from being renominated or reelected.â€
https://www.yahoo.com/news/exile-bill-kristol-republican-resister-chief-100007991.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/exile-bill-kristol-republican-resister-chief-100007991.html)
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
HOWEVER this whole banning semi-autos (or what ever they are called) seems a bit stupid to me.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
So what is the point?
Greater protection of schools and other places will sniff this mass killing out.
Another thing is your 2nd amendment - again I don't really think your gun culture is a good thing (over here the biggest problem is knife crime - which frankly is a far better compared to having your head blown off from a distance, at least I have the chance to run away lol)
HOWEVER its your way of life and i respect that, and the 2nd amendment protects your rights, it seems like these politicians want to have double standards. stop trying to chip away at the 2nd amendment, get rid of it if THE PEOPLE want to, if they don't , stop abusing it!
-
Nobody is going to mistake me for a Trump fan. I’ll criticize the hell out of him, but I’ll never go this far to actively oppose him, unless he truly does something unmistakably impeachable.
From yesterday.......
â€I’m absolutist on Trump,†Kristol told me. “He shouldn’t be president. We should limit the damage he can do as president. And we should try as hard as we can to prevent him from being renominated or reelected.â€
https://www.yahoo.com/news/exile-bill-kristol-republican-resister-chief-100007991.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/exile-bill-kristol-republican-resister-chief-100007991.html)
Yeah Kristol is out there on his own little extremist island.
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
HOWEVER this whole banning semi-autos (or what ever they are called) seems a bit stupid to me.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
So what is the point?
Greater protection of schools and other places will sniff this mass killing out.
Another thing is your 2nd amendment - again I don't really think your gun culture is a good thing (over here the biggest problem is knife crime - which frankly is a far better compared to having your head blown off from a distance, at least I have the chance to run away lol)
HOWEVER its your way of life and i respect that, and the 2nd amendment protects your rights, it seems like these politicians want to have double standards. stop trying to chip away at the 2nd amendment, get rid of it if THE PEOPLE want to, if they don't , stop abusing it!
Well said.
One question. Do you or your government for that matter not see the correlation in the fact people aren't allowed to own guns and the high rate of knife crimes? And that when you take one form of killing away from a criminal they will just find another?
If England placed the same kind of ban on knives tomorrow that they have on guns...then you'd see an increase in murder by blunt force trauma...with the most used weapon being a bat or a club.
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
HOWEVER this whole banning semi-autos (or what ever they are called) seems a bit stupid to me.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
So what is the point?
Greater protection of schools and other places will sniff this mass killing out.
Another thing is your 2nd amendment - again I don't really think your gun culture is a good thing (over here the biggest problem is knife crime - which frankly is a far better compared to having your head blown off from a distance, at least I have the chance to run away lol)
HOWEVER its your way of life and i respect that, and the 2nd amendment protects your rights, it seems like these politicians want to have double standards. stop trying to chip away at the 2nd amendment, get rid of it if THE PEOPLE want to, if they don't , stop abusing it!
Dead by a knife is still dead. I prefer to be able to defend myself.
(http://igeek.com/w/images/thumb/0/05/USvUKAdjust.png/1142px-USvUKAdjust.png)
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
HOWEVER this whole banning semi-autos (or what ever they are called) seems a bit stupid to me.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
So what is the point?
Greater protection of schools and other places will sniff this mass killing out.
Another thing is your 2nd amendment - again I don't really think your gun culture is a good thing (over here the biggest problem is knife crime - which frankly is a far better compared to having your head blown off from a distance, at least I have the chance to run away lol)
HOWEVER its your way of life and i respect that, and the 2nd amendment protects your rights, it seems like these politicians want to have double standards. stop trying to chip away at the 2nd amendment, get rid of it if THE PEOPLE want to, if they don't , stop abusing it!
Anecdotal to be sure, but the 2 friends of mine, who didn't know one another, came here from England. Once both acquired legal status, guess where they went?
To the local gun store.
-
@Stevensr123 violent, personal crime is much higher in England than here. Maybe y'all are just used to being victimized?
-
Well, when I find a president I like I stick with him. I don’t go off half cocked every time he throws out a shiny object with which to blind his political opponents. As a supporter of the NRA, I trust him enough not to take any action that would infringe on 2A. That’s how confident I am in his respect for the constitution.
Keep tossing those steps up higher there pal. Your form is impeccable.
-
@Stevensr123 , I do not mean to be insulting by asking this, but you know the history of why we have a 2nd amendment?
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
Yo Brit, If you see our old Mate EC, tell him we said "Hey"
Peace Out!
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
@Stevensr123
You have to understand. There are two economies in this. One is the cities, and the other, basically everywhere else. Most of the USA is farm, ranch, and wildlands.
While primarily instituted as a guard against tyranny and for self-defense in the 2nd amendment, The vast majority of us need guns for predator control and hunting. Along with that comes sport shooting, which is glorified target practice. That is the basis of gun culture nearly nationwide.
In the city that culture is bastardized into self-defense (where allowed) and criminal use by gangs and robbers.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
More than that, take suicides out of the picture, and something like 60% of gun deaths go away. Yes, they are counting suicides in gun violence. Then take away gang violence (largely in city slums), and the numbers drop to a nearly negligent number.
Believe me, for the vast majority of this country, guns are a good thing, and a necessary part of country living.
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
We do not expect you to understand it Steven.
However, the Japanese in WWII did understand it, and because of it - would not even entertain the idea of an invasion because as Yamamoto noted: "There will be a gun behind every blade of grass".
I think it is safe to say that had Hitler decided to forestall invading Russia for invading your country - I doubt the Nazis would have had the same reservations about doing so as the Japanese had about us.
You can think our gun culture bizarre, but our enemies both foreign and domestic understand that attempting to subjugate us by force is going to end in disaster for them.
-
...Besides I’ve been right about Donald Trump nearly every time and you have been wrong about Donald Trump nearly every time. I think I have the better track record.
@aligncare
Yeah, and I am sure you wholeheartedly support your POTUS okay with that 50 cent fuel tax too huh?. You are hilarious.
Face facts... you have "aligned" yourself with a NY liberal.
-
Of course that is what he was saying. But the kneejerk people here won't listen to reason. They'll just dismiss common sense by saying that you are a crazy Trump supporter, who will support him no matter what.
That kid in FL should have had his guns confiscated and he should have been locked up for evaluation. Anyone who can't see that is delusional and probably is a member of Alex Jones' website.
Kneejerk, my ass! Bottom line.... there was a correct way to say what you just said. What Trump said wasn't 'it'. Every time he opens his mouth and utters one of these "incorrectly stated" (outrageous) comments, he only fuels the leftist fires against him and against America. You honestly can't (won't) see that?
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
HOWEVER this whole banning semi-autos (or what ever they are called) seems a bit stupid to me.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
So what is the point?
Greater protection of schools and other places will sniff this mass killing out.
Another thing is your 2nd amendment - again I don't really think your gun culture is a good thing (over here the biggest problem is knife crime - which frankly is a far better compared to having your head blown off from a distance, at least I have the chance to run away lol)
HOWEVER its your way of life and i respect that, and the 2nd amendment protects your rights, it seems like these politicians want to have double standards. stop trying to chip away at the 2nd amendment, get rid of it if THE PEOPLE want to, if they don't , stop abusing it!
Well, my wife was born and raised in England. When I first met her, she was very anti-gun and a lot more liberal. And now after being with me for the last seventeen years, she is now a lot more conservative and a lot more pro-gun. To the point of urging me to join the NRA. Which I just did this morning.
Is there an innate difference between Americans and Britishers or Europeans? Maybe. But most Americans don't look at government the way Brits and Euros do. Especially conservatives.
For conservatives government is something to be tolerated as a necessary evil. The threat of governmental tyranny is always in the back of the minds of most conservatives.
Talking to my Brit in-laws, they're very nice people, and they're not fond of Europeans. But they're very trusting of their government doing right by them.
Personally, I don't like the way your government is going with people being thrown into prison for "hate speech crimes" and the placement and toleration of unassimilable Muslims in your country. Look at the demographics.
Once you lose liberty, it's awfully hard to get it back.
-
Kneejerk, my ass! Bottom line.... there was a correct way to say what you just said. What Trump said wasn't 'it'. Every time he opens his mouth and utters one of these "incorrectly stated" (outrageous) comments, he only fuels the leftist fires against him and against America. You honestly can't (won't) see that?
True Believers cannot.
It's why I call it the Jim Jones effect.
-
@Stevensr123 violent, personal crime is much higher in England than here. Maybe y'all are just used to being victimized?
Pretty sure that has been debunked.
Apparently its because of the way the FBI class violent crime, compared to the UK police.
"The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a ‘violent crime’ as one of four specific offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault." By contrast, "the British definition includes all ‘crimes against the person"
That said, I wasn't trying to have a **** measuring contest ^-^ just giving in my two cents.
-
Pretty sure that has been debunked.
Apparently its because of the way the FBI class violent crime, compared to the UK police.
"The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a ‘violent crime’ as one of four specific offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault." By contrast, "the British definition includes all ‘crimes against the person"
That said, I wasn't trying to have a **** measuring contest ^-^ just giving in my two cents.
The UK doesn't differentiate their crime stats? So a $100 theft is counted the same as murder?
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
HOWEVER this whole banning semi-autos (or what ever they are called) seems a bit stupid to me.
Most gun deaths involve hand guns (I think hand guns kill 19x more people compared to any other weapon over in america - although correct me if I'm wrong).
So what is the point?
Greater protection of schools and other places will sniff this mass killing out.
Another thing is your 2nd amendment - again I don't really think your gun culture is a good thing (over here the biggest problem is knife crime - which frankly is a far better compared to having your head blown off from a distance, at least I have the chance to run away lol)
HOWEVER its your way of life and i respect that, and the 2nd amendment protects your rights, it seems like these politicians want to have double standards. stop trying to chip away at the 2nd amendment, get rid of it if THE PEOPLE want to, if they don't , stop abusing it!
No... the British culture isn't a gun culture.... NOW. But they didn't call them the "Bloody British" (they loved them some beheadings events...hey...there was no American Idol, after all) for nothing.
And the term "Imperialist" really does apply to what British culture used to consist of...(unlike how some try to label America with the term)... since they had their fingers in every nation's pie.
Now, however, Britain is just another socialist (communist w/a smiley face) nation.... currently involved in 'bending over' for the invading Muslim hordes.....
that loves to look down their noses at the stepchild nation that kicked their ass once....lol.
Just sayin....
-
Speaking as an outsider (English)
I find Americans gun obsession bizarre (mainly because the British culture isn't a gun culture).
It’s ingrained. Mostly, it stems from a time when the country was founded and the resistance to King George III by armed citizens. Later, you had westward expansion where arms kept you fed and protected. Until the post WWII infrastructure expansion, most of the US was rural and not easily accessible by today’s standards. A firearm was a ubiquitous tool in American life. Once the Cold War and nuclear threats arose, it was an essential part of civil defense. Now that we’re more ‘civilized,’ with a professional volunteer armed forces, and connection with the rest of the world, some might say we no longer need them. However, expanding government influence and intrusion into modern life has brought us back to resistance - this time to the threat of domestic tyranny.
-
Pretty sure that has been debunked.
Apparently its because of the way the FBI class violent crime, compared to the UK police.
"The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a ‘violent crime’ as one of four specific offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault." By contrast, "the British definition includes all ‘crimes against the person"
That said, I wasn't trying to have a **** measuring contest ^-^ just giving in my two cents.
Once you know this, Bier wrote, "it becomes clear how misleading it is to compare rates of violent crime in the U.S. and the U.K. You’re simply comparing two different sets of crimes."
We thought Bier’s points were reasonable, so we tried to replicate his approach. We looked at the raw violent crime numbers for each country, using statistics for England and Wales for 2012 and for the United States for 2011, in a way that sought to compare apples to apples. (We should note that the United Kingdom includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the numbers in the meme appear to be based only on crime in England and Wales, which are calculated separately.)
For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people.
This calculation suggests that there is a higher rate of crime in England and Wales, but the discrepancy is not anywhere near as wide as the one cited in the meme.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/24/blog-posting/social-media-post-says-uk-has-far-higher-violent-c/ (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/24/blog-posting/social-media-post-says-uk-has-far-higher-violent-c/)
-
Pretty sure that has been debunked.
Myth: Britain has strict gun control and thus a low crime rate
Fact: The United Kingdom has always had a lower homicide rate than the United States, even when British citizens could legally buy machine guns (Briton’s modern era of gun control did not ramp up until the 1960s). The difference is cultural, not legal.
Fact: Since gun banning has escalated in the UK, the rate of crime – especially violent crime – has risen.
Fact: Ironically, firearm use in crimes in the UK has doubled in the decade since handguns were banned. 17
Fact: Britain has the highest rate of violent crime in Europe, more so than the United States or even South Africa. They also have the second highest overall crime rate in the European Union. In 2008, Britain had a violent crime rate nearly five times higher than the United States (2034 vs. 446 per 100,000 population). 18
Fact: 67% of British residents surveyed believed that “As a result of gun and knife crime [rising], the area I live in is not as safe as it was five years ago.†19
Fact: U.K. street robberies soared 28% in 2001. Violent crime was up 11%, murders up 4%, and rapes were up 14%. 20
Fact: This trend continued in the U.K in 2004 with a 10% increase in street crime, 8% increase in muggings, and a 22% increase in robberies.
Fact: In 1919, before it had any gun control, the U.K. had a homicide rate that was 8% of the U.S. rate. By 1986, and after enacting significant gun control, the rate was 9% – practically unchanged. 21
Fact: “… [There is] nothing in the statistics for England and Wales to suggest that either the stricter controls on handguns prior to 1997 or the ban imposed since have controlled access to such firearms by criminals.†22
Fact: Comparing crime rates between America and Britain is fundamentally flawed. In America, a gun crime is recorded as a gun crime. In Britain, a crime is only recorded when there is a final disposition (a conviction). All unsolved gun crimes in Britain are not reported as gun crimes, grossly undercounting the amount of gun crime there. 23 To make matters worse, British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism. 24
Fact: An ongoing parliamentary inquiry in Britain into the growing number of black market weapons has concluded that there are more than three million illegally held firearms in circulation – double the number believed to have been held 10 years ago – and that criminals are more willing than ever to use them. One in three criminals under the age of 25 possesses or has access to a firearm. 25
British Offenses in 2000
Offense category
Increase from pre-ban
Armed Robbery
170.1%
Kidnapping/abduction
144.0%
Assault
130.9%
Attempted murder
117.6%
Sexual assault
112.6%
Fact: Handgun homicides in England and Wales reached an all-time high in 2000, years after a virtual ban on private handgun ownership. More than 3,000 crimes involving handguns were recorded in 1999-2000, including 42 homicides, 310 cases of attempted murder, 2,561 robberies and 204 burglaries. 26
Fact: Handguns were used in 3,685 British offenses in 2000 compared with 2,648 in 1997, an increase of 40%. 27 It is interesting to note:
Of the 20 areas with the lowest number of legal firearms, 10 had an above average level of “gun crime.â€
Of the 20 areas with the highest levels of legal guns, only 2 had armed crime levels above the average.
Fact: Between 1997 and 1999, there were 429 murders in London, the highest two-year figure for more than 10 years – nearly two-thirds of those involved firearms – in a country that has virtually banned private firearm ownership. 28
Fact: Over the last century, the British crime rate was largely unchanged. In the late nineteenth century, the per capita homicide rate in Britain was between 1.0 and 1.5 per 100,000. 29 In the late twentieth century, after a near ban on gun ownership, the homicide rate is around 1.4. 30 This implies that the homicide rate did not vary with either the level of gun control or gun availability.
Fact: The U.K. has strict gun control and a rising homicide rate of 1.4 per 100,000. Switzerland has the highest per capita firearm ownership rate on the planet (all males age 20 to 42 are required to keep rifles or pistols at home) and has a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. To date, there has never been a schoolyard massacre in Switzerland. 31
Fact: “… the scale of gun crime in the capital [London] has forced senior officers to set up a specialist unit to deal with … shootings.†32
Myth: Gun bans elsewhere work
Fact: Though illegal, side-street gun makers thrive in the Philippines, primarily hand crafting exact replicas of submachine guns, which are often the simplest type of gun to manufacture. Estimates are that almost half of all guns in the Philippines are illegal. 42
Fact: Chinese police destroyed 113 illegal gun factories and shops in a three-month crackdown in 2006. Police seized 2,445 tons of explosives, 4.81 million detonators and 117,000 guns. 43
Myth: The United States has the highest violence rate because of lax gun control
http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/ (http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/)
The cities and states with the strictest gun control laws in our country...where the ban is in place except in name...have some of the highest homicide and violent crime stats in the U.S.
-
@Stevensr123 , I do not mean to be insulting by asking this, but you know the history of why we have a 2nd amendment?
yes I do ^-^ And I understand completely why it was necessary. Sadly though I the world is a completely different place compared to 200+ years ago, when people where ACTUALLY free, government was small etc I think fighting against your current government would be a different beast, not that its ever likely to happen.
Well said.
One question. Do you or your government for that matter not see the correlation in the fact people aren't allowed to own guns and the high rate of knife crimes? And that when you take one form of killing away from a criminal they will just find another?
If England placed the same kind of ban on knives tomorrow that they have on guns...then you'd see an increase in murder by blunt force trauma...with the most used weapon being a bat or a club.
I think 100% the reason why knife crime is up, is because of guns where banned, at the same time though I think their was and has always been a massive cultural difference and I think culture is probably the main reason why so many people are dying.
People are far too internally repressed these days, computer games, the internet etc people are losing their social skills and becoming numb to emotions, that plus over here at least, society is far too weak against crime and d**k heads. this goes for both sides of the pond. Kids these days just have a complete lack of respect for authority and the fellow man
@Stevensr123
You have to understand. There are two economies in this. One is the cities, and the other, basically everywhere else. Most of the USA is farm, ranch, and wildlands.
While primarily instituted as a guard against tyranny and for self-defense in the 2nd amendment, The vast majority of us need guns for predator control and hunting. Along with that comes sport shooting, which is glorified target practice. That is the basis of gun culture nearly nationwide.
In the city that culture is bastardized into self-defense (where allowed) and criminal use by gangs and robbers.
More than that, take suicides out of the picture, and something like 60% of gun deaths go away. Yes, they are counting suicides in gun violence. Then take away gang violence (largely in city slums), and the numbers drop to a nearly negligent number.
Believe me, for the vast majority of this country, guns are a good thing, and a necessary part of country living.
.
I completely understand, guns here are still available for hunting etc same when i lived in Australia. the country man will always need a rifle on hand to deal with the threats that the country life imposes. I shot a nice kangaroo (which is considered a pest in Australia) and it was cool, I just don't have the urge to ever want one because I live in the city :)
-
No... the British culture isn't a gun culture.... NOW. But they didn't call them the "Bloody British" (they loved them some beheadings events...hey...there was no American Idol, after all) for nothing.
And the term "Imperialist" really does apply to what British culture used to consist of...(unlike how some try to label America with the term)... since they had their fingers in every nation's pie.
Now, however, Britain is just another socialist (communist w/a smiley face) nation.... currently involved in 'bending over' for the invading Muslim hordes.....
that loves to look down their noses at the stepchild nation that kicked their ass once....lol.
Just sayin....
I personally love the fact we where imperialists :) ( the people on the left hate our dirty past though haha)
Without the British spreading the English language and technology and Christianity , we would probably be all Muslim by now.
To be honest, most of the British are centralist, when ever most governments over here get into power, its because they have a centralist policy (mix of good business policies plus social policies like education, houses, health etc).
It's the reason why the most left labour party in decades haven't got into power when we are run by probably the most incompetent government ever - thankfully!
-
I personally love the fact we where imperialists :) ( the people on the left hate our dirty past though haha)
Without the British spreading the English language and technology and Christianity , we would probably be all Muslim by now.
And worse. Most of the nations you left (excepting this one in which you were KICKED out), fell into despotism, poverty and genocide. Rhodesia is a sterling testament to what happens when British Colonialism retreated into itself.
-
I personally love the fact we where imperialists :) ( the people on the left hate our dirty past though haha)
Without the British spreading the English language and technology and Christianity , we would probably be all Muslim by now.
Good stuff!.. LOL
Now was it Wilde or Shaw who said "England and America are two countries divided by a common language."
-
I completely understand, guns here are still available for hunting etc same when i lived in Australia. the country man will always need a rifle on hand to deal with the threats that the country life imposes. I shot a nice kangaroo (which is considered a pest in Australia) and it was cool, I just don't have the urge to ever want one because I live in the city :)
@Stevensr123
Then what, pray tell, do you find so bizarre?
-
Good stuff!.. LOL
Now was it Wilde or Shaw who said "England and America are two countries divided by a common language."
I thought it was Churchill.
-
I thought it was Churchill.
I don't think so on this one. He did say we "Americans will always do the right thing once we have exhausted all other options" Which is true...most of the time.!
-
‘Was it Wilde or Shaw?’ The answer appears to be: both. In The Canterville Ghost (1887), Wilde wrote: ‘We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language’. However, the 1951 Treasury of Humorous Quotations (Esar & Bentley) quotes Shaw as saying: ‘England and America are two countries separated by the same language’, but without giving a source. The quote had earlier been attributed to Shaw in Reader’s Digest (November 1942).
-
@Stevensr123
Then what, pray tell, do you find so bizarre?
Just the complete normality of it, but again its a class of cultures ^-^
My personal opinions though is that your country was founded upon the right to own a gun, their are hundreds of millions in circulation and its impossible to get rid of them so they should stop trying. Instead they should:
1. Actually enforce the policies already made
2. increase mental health support
3. More protection of schools - it astounds me given the current predicament of so many losers wanting to shoot up schools, that their isn't law enforcement at every single school in america.
4. Make gun education mandatory in schools - teach kids about them, explain that they are not toys, they are tools that have immense power and they are not to be taken lightly and ingrain in them the proper ways of handling them and the laws surrounding them
Thats just my thoughts though :) I could be completely wrong :laugh:
-
Just the complete normality of it, but against its a class of cultures ^-^
My personal opinions though is that your country was founded upon the right to own a gun, their are hundreds of millions in circulation and its impossible to get rid of them so they should stop trying. Instead they should:
1. Actually enforce the policies alright made
2. increase mental health support
3. More protection of schools - it astounds me given the current predicament of so many losers wanting to shoot up schools, that their isn't law enforcement at every single school in america.
4. Make gun education mandatory in schools - teach kids about them, explain that they are not toys, they are tools that have immense power and they are not to be taken lightly and ingrain in them the proper ways of handling them and the laws surrounding them
Thats just my thoughts though :) I could be completely wrong :laugh:
#4 used to be done in schools. Then the left wing in the country and their irrational fear of guns made sure those types of classes were removed.
But in any event...it shouldn't be the schools teaching that...it's up to the parents and family members tondo that.
School need to concentrate on teaching kids to read and spell correctly.
-
School need to concentrate on teaching kids to read and spell correctly.
The spelling portion was always my beef with the phrase ‘learning the three Rs.’
-
The spelling portion was always my beef with the phrase ‘learning the three Rs.’
Blame it on those tea-slurping slowcoaches that gave us the language!
-
... English language and technology and Christianity ...
I would like to add English Common Law and terriers to that list.
-
So you have a Mr Social Justice Warrior, let's call him David. Well David really hates gun owners. He sees many comments on local news articles by a man named Pete defending the NRA and gun ownership. So David decides to take action. He and his friends call their local police chief (good old progressive guy too) over and over making accusations that Pete is mentally unstable. They don't really know Pete or if be really is, but in their mind, anyone who thinks like Pete is a danger to society.
So Mr police Chief, listening to David and his friends, confiscate all of Pete's guns with zero due process and very little recourse.
This isn't crazy, it already happens with parents having children removed by CPS for the parents beliefs. It ilso is how SJWs stifle speech on social media.
@AbaraXas
So Pete sues the pants off the local PD and the snitch,and ends up owning everything the snitch had,sells it,and uses the money to buy a few new Class 3 MG's.
-
@Stevensr123
So, what due process would someone where you live receive? Let’s say it was this kind of scenario:
You think you're mad, too unstable
Kicking in chairs and knocking down tables
In a restaurant in a West End town
-
You believe authorities should be allowed to take all weapons if "someone" reports them to be crazy?
Guilty until proven innocent without investigation?
Or do I misunderstand you?
@thackney
You CLEARLY misunderstand not only me,but the legality of the process. "Emotionally disturbed" is a MEDICAL condition,and only a MD that is a shrink can tag you with that label. Your neighbors can't,and neither can the cops. If the cops come and detain you and confiscate your weapons without a diagnosis stating you are suffering from a mental condition you can sue them AND the snitch for false arrest and a host of other things. Especially the snitch if he or she isn't a licensed shrink.
What cops CAN and WILL do is come to check on you if they get reports you are acting crazy regardless of if you have weapons or not. If the cops that show up at your door think you appear to be on vacation from reality,they CAN and WILL "detain you for a mental exam by a professional",and the shrink will decide if you are a head case or not. ONLY if the shrink decides you are mentally disturbed and a danger to the public can the cops legally seize your weapons,and even then they can only seize them if you are being released to go back home. Which means you can't be THAT much of a threat,so you can and will get them back,and once you get them back you can sue the hell out of the neighbor,etc,etc,etc that dropped the dime on you.
There is nothing new about this. There has never been a time in the history of this,or any other country where weapons weren't taken away from known dangerous loons. The only exceptions of course being dangerous loons that wore crowns on their heads.
-
@AbaraXas
So Pete sues the pants off the local PD and the snitch,and ends up owning everything the snitch had,sells it,and uses the money to buy a few new Class 3 MG's.
Here is a fun challenge, find the past time something like this actually happened. The court and law enforcement system is designed to protect itself.
-
@AbaraXas
So Pete sues the pants off the local PD and the snitch,and ends up owning everything the snitch had,sells it,and uses the money to buy a few new Class 3 MG's.
What if the PD is immunized, because the good ol' boy Chief acted "in good faith?" And what if the snitch doesn't have two nickels to rub together?
-
Sad and yet totally predictable you'd have this attitude towards Trump making that kind of statement...but would be in a hand wringing hysterical panic if Hillary or Obama had said the same thing.
@txradioguy
Are you REALLY so freaking dense you can't understand the difference between Hillary or Obomber and Trump? Both Bubbette! and Bathhouse Barry are life-long communists that have wanted the government to seize guns from citizens since they were teens.
Trump,on the other hand,owns guns,has a CCW permit in NYC,and has a personal history of being pro-gun.
What the HELL is the matter with you people? Are you so in love with the alleged Republican Party Usual Suspects for President that you have lost every bit of common sense? Up to this date Trump has been the most conservative president since Reagan,and all you clowns have done since day 1 is scream about "he's just like Hillary and Obama! WAAAAH! WAAAAH! WAAAH!"
-
And what about that thing called the 4th Amendment?
@txradioguy
PLEASE point out where it says crazy people have the right to own weapons..
What was truly crazy was allowing the left to get all the state mental hospitals closed,and all the craze and borderline crazy people let free to try to fend for themselves. The left doesn't give a single damn about the welfare of the mentally disturbed,they did it to try to create chaos so their much lusted after Communist Revolution might happen.
EVERYTHING the left does is done to try to destroy our way of live in order to create another Communist Slave State.
-
Yes...this was exactly what the Soviets used so effectively in maintaining tyranny.
I don't know. Perhaps because so few know history or the Constitution, so they think things like due process are mere niceties, to fall by the wayside until the government decides the citizens may have their rights back.
@Suppressed
Ok,you are hopeless. Change your screen name to Depressed and be done with it.
-
What if the PD is immunized, because the good ol' boy Chief acted "in good faith?" And what if the snitch doesn't have two nickels to rub together?
End result is the same. The lawful gun owner who did nothing wrong doesn't get his weapons back until the months or years of litigation is over with.
-
IIRC...FDR did the same thing...St. Elizabeth's in DC was used for basically the same purpose.
@txradioguy
King Franklin used St.Elizabeth's as a place to lock away and drug into oblivion other politicians that tried to stand in his way. I don't think "normal people" went there,only people that pissed off Comrade Roosevelt or his lovely cousin-wife.
-
@txradioguy
PLEASE point out where it says crazy people have the right to own weapons..
Please show where due process rights make exceptions for "crazy people".
What was truly crazy was allowing the left to get all the state mental hospitals closed,and all the craze and borderline crazy people let free to try to fend for themselves. The left doesn't give a single damn about the welfare of the mentally disturbed,they did it to try to create chaos so their much lusted after Communist Revolution might happen.
No argument from me on that.
EVERYTHING the left does is done to try to destroy our way of live in order to create another Communist Slave State.
I agree...however we shouldn't help them achieve their end goal.
-
@thackney ...
What cops CAN and WILL do is come to check on you if they get reports you are acting crazy regardless of if you have weapons or not. If the cops that show up at your door think you appear to be on vacation from reality,they CAN and WILL "detain you for a mental exam by a professional",and the shrink will decide if you are a head case or not. ONLY if the shrink decides you are mentally disturbed and a danger to the public can the cops legally seize your weapons,and even then they can only seize them if you are being released to go back home....
Thanks for clarifying. I suspected there was more than just "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them..."
Does judge sign anything like they would for a search warrant? Or is it only the police and the doctor working together for a legal seizure of your weapons?
-
End result is the same. The lawful gun owner who did nothing wrong doesn't get his weapons back until the months or years of litigation is over with.
@txradioguy
If he does then. There are many cases nationwide where peoples guns are taken as evidence and never returned. The police dept just refuses to turn them over and the only option is to get a court order, which costs more than the gun. Even then some police depts have refused to return firearms.
-
**nononono*
@PartyPodPeople
Don't worry about it. EVERYBODY but you is wrong,and one day you will have the honor of voting for another piece of shit Texan for President.
-
@Suppressed
Ok,you are hopeless. Change your screen name to Depressed and be done with it.
That's okay...I can just declare you crazy and have all your rights stripped, and you'll be fine with it. That will cheer me up.
(Seriously, though, it wouldn't. I don't find tyranny amusing.)
-
@Victoria33
I think you're letting your dislike for him as a person color your judgement.
@driftdiver
They are all steamed that Trump beat Cruz,and having hissy-fits over it 24/7. They do love their "regular Republicans". You know,the kind that have stabbed us in the back every since Reagan left office?
-
@driftdriver
No, I evaluate his "behavior". That was my job for over twenty years, evaluating behavior. His behavior tells me he likely has a personality disorder, along with a learning disability. Numerous mental professionals also believe this, due to his behavior that fits certain mental disorders. It is my opinion, he should not be president due to this. Also, due to this, he may not be president for his whole term.
@Victoria33
You also believe in Holy Spooks and all sorts of other foolish crap.
-
...Besides I’ve been right about Donald Trump nearly every time and you have been wrong about Donald Trump nearly every time. I think I have the better track record.
@aligncare
It's not about being right or wrong,it's about protecting the party from a outsider that hasn't kissed the right rings! What if he really does do well and is re-elected? How can the alleged Republican Party survive such a thing? What will all the little Bushes and Cruz's do with themselves? Will they have to get real jobs?
WHERE is your sense of order?
-
Nobody is going to mistake me for a Trump fan. I’ll criticize the hell out of him, but I’ll never go this far to actively oppose him, unless he truly does something unmistakably impeachable.
From yesterday.......
â€I’m absolutist on Trump,†Kristol told me. “He shouldn’t be president. We should limit the damage he can do as president. And we should try as hard as we can to prevent him from being renominated or reelected.â€
https://www.yahoo.com/news/exile-bill-kristol-republican-resister-chief-100007991.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/exile-bill-kristol-republican-resister-chief-100007991.html)
@edpc
If Bill "Commie" Kristol hates and fears him,it makes me want to start a "Trump in 2020 Fund".
-
Yeah Kristol is out there on his own little extremist island.
@txradioguy
Maybe I am wrong,but he sounds just like you to me.
-
Here is a fun challenge, find the past time something like this actually happened. The court and law enforcement system is designed to protect itself.
@AbaraXas
You don't think this would happen on a daily basis if the police were to start just taking the word of a caller to detain someone and confiscate their weapons without a court order?
-
Thanks for clarifying. I suspected there was more than just "when someone is reported to the police to be acting crazy,you take his or her weapons away from them..."
Does judge sign anything like they would for a search warrant? Or is it only the police and the doctor working together for a legal seizure of your weapons?
@thackney
A judge HAS to sign a court order to confiscate someone's weapons if they haven't been used in a crime,and it HAS to state on the court order why and what authorization was used. Hell,they have to do that to confiscate someone's car,and we have no Constitutional right to own a car.
-
End result is the same. The lawful gun owner who did nothing wrong doesn't get his weapons back until the months or years of litigation is over with.
And the lawful owner is the only poor sap with any skin in the game. The cop is not held to account, and the snitch isn't either. He's free to "SWAT" somebody else.
-
@thackney
A judge HAS to sign a court order to confiscate someone's weapons if they haven't been used in a crime,and it HAS to state on the court order why and what authorization was used. Hell,they have to do that to confiscate someone's car,and we have no Constitutional right to own a car.
Sounds great, which throws Trump's comments at the top of thread into stark relief. He says he wants to go straight to confiscation, then backfill the court stuff later. The crap ain't gonna fly. Never mind the 2nd Amendment, what about the 4th and 5th?
-
@thackney
A judge HAS to sign a court order to confiscate someone's weapons if they haven't been used in a crime,and it HAS to state on the court order why and what authorization was used. Hell,they have to do that to confiscate someone's car,and we have no Constitutional right to own a car.
Hey Pete, CAF. The instrument Sessions wants to expand already nullifies the legal requirement you cited.
Civil Asset Forfeiture.
No court order is needed anymore to confiscate property if the police 'think' what you own or possess was obtained by illicit means such as trafficking. It's become an industry. And no - the victims do not get their stuff or cash back.
-
@thackney
A judge HAS to sign a court order to confiscate someone's weapons if they haven't been used in a crime,and it HAS to state on the court order why and what authorization was used. Hell,they have to do that to confiscate someone's car,and we have no Constitutional right to own a car.
That sounds like due process happening before the taking of weapons. I appreciate the confirmation.
-
@txradioguy
....
What the HELL is the matter with you people? Are you so in love with the alleged Republican Party Usual Suspects for President that you have lost every bit of common sense? Up to this date Trump has been the most conservative president since Reagan,and all you clowns have done since day 1 is scream about "he's just like Hillary and Obama! WAAAAH! WAAAAH! WAAAH!"
Wow, Pete, that's quite a screed. Speaking for myself, I'm not in love with the Republican party and never have been. As for "Up to this date Trump has been the most conservative president since Reagan" the problem is that now he left that behind in the rear view mirror and did a screeching left turn on two tires. Remember, this thread is about Trump saying "'Take the guns first, go through due process second'". Maybe you find that conservative and defensible, but I sure as hell don't.
-
Just the complete normality of it, but again its a class of cultures ^-^
@Stevensr123
Oh, I see then... Carry on.
:beer:
1. Actually enforce the policies already made
That's right.
2. increase mental health support
Good God, y'all! That's all we need is more shrinks! Shrinks are in large part responsible for the problem! Rather, largely discard the opinions of modern psychiatry, and teach singular morality, personal responsibility and self-reliance, and duty and honor before God - Out in the sticks, that's how it is, in the last beating heartland of this nation... And there are nowhere near the problems found in the cancerous cities that spew liberal claptrap largely defined by shrinks.
3. More protection of schools - it astounds me given the current predicament of so many losers wanting to shoot up schools, that their isn't law enforcement at every single school in america.
Largely impossible. They are already run like prisons. The problem with schools is their abrogation of the right of self defense. 'gun-free-zones' make them a soft target.
4. Make gun education mandatory in schools - teach kids about them, explain that they are not toys, they are tools that have immense power and they are not to be taken lightly and ingrain in them the proper ways of handling them and the laws surrounding them
That's right, and how it used to be.
:beer:
-
End result is the same. The lawful gun owner who did nothing wrong doesn't get his weapons back until the months or years of litigation is over with.
! No longer available (http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZaLh74eXTDo#)
During the townhall, Sheriff Israel, who has no credibility on red flags, discusses what he wants from an enhanced Baker Act. It’s similar to what Trump said in his meeting. The fact they’re on the same page with this is disgraceful. You can see Israel’s comments on it beginning at the 1:13:45 mark. Later in the discussion, he goes on to say how the person would not get the weapons back until they’ve completed some sort of rehabilitation process. That could be any length of time - months or years, as you said. Most likely, it would be permanent. They just don’t want to say it.
-
‘Was it Wilde or Shaw?’ The answer appears to be: both. In The Canterville Ghost (1887), Wilde wrote: ‘We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language’. However, the 1951 Treasury of Humorous Quotations (Esar & Bentley) quotes Shaw as saying: ‘England and America are two countries separated by the same language’, but without giving a source. The quote had earlier been attributed to Shaw in Reader’s Digest (November 1942).
Thanks for that, I had always thought it was Wilde.
-
Thanks for that, I had always thought it was Wilde.
AS you know we are an erudite lot, and we hide it well!
-
AS you know we are an erudite lot, and we hide it well!
Were just Renaissance men, I supposed, shade tree fix it guys.
We know a little bit about a whole lot, and a whole lot about a little bit.
-
Thanks for that, I had always thought it was Wilde.
Wilde did say it first, so I guess he should probably get top billing. Besides, I can’t stand Shaw, due to his stances on socialism and eugenics.
-
@AbaraXas
So Pete sues the pants off the local PD and the snitch,and ends up owning everything the snitch had,sells it,and uses the money to buy a few new Class 3 MG's.
...which will later be confiscated through CAF, without due process......
-
Were just Renaissance men, I supposed, shade tree fix it guys.
We know a little bit about a whole lot, and a whole lot about a little bit.
LOL.. A jack of all trades and a master of none! 888high58888
-
Wow, Pete, that's quite a screed. Speaking for myself, I'm not in love with the Republican party and never have been. As for "Up to this date Trump has been the most conservative president since Reagan" the problem is that now he left that behind in the rear view mirror and did a screeching left turn on two tires. Remember, this thread is about Trump saying "'Take the guns first, go through due process second'". Maybe you find that conservative and defensible, but I sure as hell don't.
@Sanguine
Me neither. I've been avoiding this thread like the plague until this morning, and we are way far away from where this discussion started. Trump took a really dumb stand on the application of due process, and he's yet to walk that back.
-
Worth the price of admission just to see @sneakypete come over and straighten folks out – in successive order! :silly:
-
Worth the price of admission just to see @sneakypete come over and straighten folks out – in successive order! :silly:
I guess you're getting what you paid for.
-
I guess you're getting what you paid for.
All 2 cents worth.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/ct8hAhl.jpg)
-
Hey Pete, CAF. The instrument Sessions wants to expand already nullifies the legal requirement you cited.
Civil Asset Forfeiture.
No court order is needed anymore to confiscate property if the police 'think' what you own or possess was obtained by illicit means such as trafficking. It's become an industry. And no - the victims do not get their stuff or cash back.
@INVAR
I have no idea what Sessions wants to do,but he is going to be limited by what Trump,Congress,and the US Constitution ALLOW him to do.
The asset seizure laws due to drug trafficking seem reasonable on one hand,because you are not supposed to be able to profit from crime. On the other hand and both feet,anybody that tries to tell you the cops haven't abused the HELL out of that authority right up PAST the point they are legally STEALING is either a liar or a fool.
And it won't stop until Congress starts slapping hands and putting judges and LEO's on trial for theft and abuse of power.
-
@INVAR
I have no idea what Sessions wants to do,but he is going to be limited by what Trump,Congress,and the US Constitution ALLOW him to do.
The asset seizure laws due to drug trafficking seem reasonable on one hand,because you are not supposed to be able to profit from crime. On the other hand and both feet,anybody that tries to tell you the cops haven't abused the HELL out of that authority right up PAST the point they are legally STEALING is either a liar or a fool.
And it won't stop until Congress starts slapping hands and putting judges and LEO's on trial for theft and abuse of power.
I'm sure that'll happen any minute now...
-
That sounds like due process happening before the taking of weapons. I appreciate the confirmation.
@thackney
It's one of those things that teeter on a pin. Depends on the situation. If the suspect is ranting and raving and pointing loaded guns at people,the cops on the scene WILL seize the guns he is waving,and chances are will seize all of them temporarily until the dust settles. If this happens on a Sunday night,chances are it will be Monday morning before a judge can sign a order. Meanwhile,the cops have all the guns at the police station,locked away in an evidence locker if they haven't stolen them to take home or sell on the streets. Meanwhile 12-24 may have passed since the initial seizure,but I am fairly certain the law allows some leeway on timing,but the reality is that even if the cops have the guns,they only have them temporarily and MUST give them back unless there is a court order showing cause.
So,yeah. Sometimes they seize the guns BEFORE they have the court order in their hands,but no matter how much people rant and rave and thump their chest in outrage,it is NOT a "Seizure" until there is a legal court order,and that court order must be for cause. Cops don't decide cause,judges do,and their are pretty damn jealous of their authority.
STILL,some chicken little is going to be out there screaming about how the sky is falling.
-
Remember, this thread is about Trump saying "'Take the guns first, go through due process second'". Maybe you find that conservative and defensible, but I sure as hell don't.
No,this thread is about idiots wetting their panties in panic over semantics. Cops have been confiscating guns on the spot since guns and spots were invented and noticed. What they HAVEN'T been doing is KEEPING the guns they seize. Cops have ALWAYS had the right to seize ANY weapons found in the possession of someone they arrest or take into custody for a medial check. ALWAYS. They just don't have the right to KEEP them. They can NOT keep them without a court order. Period.
-
No,this thread is about idiots wetting their panties in panic over semantics. Cops have been confiscating guns on the spot since guns and spots were invented and noticed. What they HAVEN'T been doing is KEEPING the guns they seize. Cops have ALWAYS had the right to seize ANY weapons found in the possession of someone they arrest or take into custody for a medial check. ALWAYS. They just don't have the right to KEEP them. They can NOT keep them without a court order. Period.
They took them on the scene because they had what's called "probable cause" to confiscate them.
What Trump is advocating doing is seizing the guns without...on the mere word that someone is crazy with no real proof and worry about the 4th Amendment after the fact
That is ass backwards as to how America and the Constitution is supposed to work.
Why you're defending someone advocating for the exact opposite and for something that is unconstitutional is beyond me and a lot of people here.
-
@Stevensr123
Oh, I see then... Carry on.
:beer:
Good God, y'all! That's all we need is more shrinks!
@agreed
There is NO group of Americans,including inmates in mental institutions nuttier than shrinks. They go into the profession to try to find a way to heal themselves or because insanity runs in their family and they need to try to prepare themselves to beat it.
In reality,all the do and all they can do is tell you what you already know,and then sedate you. Nobody fixes broken minds. It just doesn't happen. It MIGHT happen in the near future,but my best GUESS is if it becomes possible it will be due to nano-technology and tiny little "robots" doing surgery in your veins.
-
No,this thread is about idiots wetting their panties in panic over semantics. Cops have been confiscating guns on the spot since guns and spots were invented and noticed. What they HAVEN'T been doing is KEEPING the guns they seize. Cops have ALWAYS had the right to seize ANY weapons found in the possession of someone they arrest or take into custody for a medial check. ALWAYS. They just don't have the right to KEEP them. They can NOT keep them without a court order. Period.
Who kidnapped Pete and replaced him with you? @sneakypete isn't nearly as trusting of process as you seem to be. Sorry, but I personally know people who had to sue to get their weapons returned. True, it was California, but it was in these United States.
-
@Sanguine
Me neither. I've been avoiding this thread like the plague until this morning, and we are way far away from where this discussion started. Trump took a really dumb stand on the application of due process, and he's yet to walk that back.
@Cyber Liberty
Why should he snatch the line back now,when the "fish" he is after haven't finished hooking themselves yet?
-
@Cyber Liberty
Why should he snatch the line back now,when the "fish" he is after haven't finished hooking themselves yet?
I'll give you the hope this is an angler's trick....
-
(https://i.imgur.com/ct8hAhl.jpg)
@MeshugeMikey
Di-Fi is married to a weapons expert,so she should know everything there is to know. Her Husband used to be the Chief Counsel for NORINCO,the Chinese gun manufacturer and importer that bought all those Semi-Auto AK-47's and the Chinese copy of the Colt 1911A1 into the country. They would still be importing them too,if the BATF hadn't ran a stink operation on Norinco and had PROOF they were also illegally importing full-auto AK-47's into the country and selling them to drug gangs and street gangs.
The BATF had to brief any Senate agencies having to do with trade or firearms on the upcoming raid the day before it happened,and for some odd reason nobody seems to be able to figure out,EVERY NORINCO official in the US caught a flight out of the US that very night,and none of them have been back,since.
MY best guess it that it was just a coinkydink that she was briefed on the raids the same day her husbands employers fled the US.
NOW you know where DI-Fi got the AK-s she was so fond of holding while her photo was taken.
-
All 2 cents worth.
I was guessing zero.
-
No,this thread is about idiots wetting their panties in panic over semantics. Cops have been confiscating guns on the spot since guns and spots were invented and noticed. What they HAVEN'T been doing is KEEPING the guns they seize. Cops have ALWAYS had the right to seize ANY weapons found in the possession of someone they arrest or take into custody for a medial check. ALWAYS. They just don't have the right to KEEP them. They can NOT keep them without a court order. Period.
Pete, you can't change the topic of a thread just because you want to discuss something else.
-
Sorry, but I personally know people who had to sue to get their weapons returned.
I have a friend that tried to off himself with his lever action 30/30. This was 40 years ago,and his left arm is still a flipper. He had to get out of the hospital and off the pain pills to get his 30/30 back,but he still has it today,and he did NOT have to hire a lawyer. I just took him to the Sheriff's office and we asking him "when the hell is he going to get his rifle back?" after he got tired of asking the cop that responded to the shots fired call. He had it the next day.
True, it was California, but it was in these United States.
Well,that's one opinion.
-
Pete, you can't change the topic of a thread just because you want to discuss something else.
He's obligated to change the subject because...MAGA /s
-
I have a friend that tried to off himself with his lever action 30/30. This was 40 years ago,and his left arm is still a flipper.
Has the ‘I’m unarmed’ joke worn out yet?
-
They took them on the scene because they had what's called "probable cause" to confiscate them. ...
And the definition of "probable cause" is what the new bill will (may) address specific to school shootings --- putting due process before confiscating weapons.
@txradioguy
-
No,this thread is about idiots wetting their panties in panic over semantics. ....
QFT. 88devil
@sneakypete
-
And the definition of "probable cause" is what the new bill will (may) address specific to school shootings --- putting due process before confiscating weapons.
@txradioguy
Oh, I get it, it's like deciding the definition of "is".
-
Oh, I get it, it's like deciding the definition of "is".
Yes, with your pants still on.
-
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
-
@agreed
There is NO group of Americans,including inmates in mental institutions nuttier than shrinks. They go into the profession to try to find a way to heal themselves or because insanity runs in their family and they need to try to prepare themselves to beat it.
But you are willing to let those same lipless metrosexual bastards decide whether I'm looney or not and authorize the state to take my shit? You've gotta be kidding me.
-
Everything Trump says makes sense when you just preface it with, "Donald from Queens, you're on the air."
-
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Give the Constitution a rest txradio! It's an obstacle for Trump to achieve MAGA.
Besides, we're all twisted up in our panties because plain words are just semantics.
Kindof like how our Rights are not really Rights, but *reasonably regulated* government-granted privileges.
-
Give the Constitution a rest txradio! It's an obstacle for Trump to achieve MAGA.
Besides, we're all twisted up in our panties because plain words are just semantics.
Kindof like how our Rights are not really Rights, but *reasonably regulated* government-granted privileges.
There seem to be some folks here that believe like Obama did that the Constitution is "deeply flawed" and should be changed /ignored because it is a "charter negative liberties".
-
But you are willing to let those same lipless metrosexual bastards decide whether I'm looney or not and authorize the state to take my shit? You've gotta be kidding me.
@roamer_1
Are you turning into a drama queen,too? What,you think some shrink is going to declare you a mental basket case while you are at home minding your own business,and authorize the cops to go get you?
Have you ever heard of a class of people called "Judges"? Or another class called "Lawyers"? The "lawyer" people LOVE to sue the hell out of city,state,and federal agencies because that's where the deep pockets and bad lawyers live.
-
Give the Constitution a rest txradio! It's an obstacle for Trump to achieve MAGA.
Besides, we're all twisted up in our panties because plain words are just semantics.
Kindof like how our Rights are not really Rights, but *reasonably regulated* government-granted privileges.
@INVAR
You obviously don't even understand the quote you just posted.
I honestly can't remember they last time I saw panic on this level.
-
No,this thread is about idiots wetting their panties in panic over semantics. Cops have been confiscating guns on the spot since guns and spots were invented and noticed. What they HAVEN'T been doing is KEEPING the guns they seize. Cops have ALWAYS had the right to seize ANY weapons found in the possession of someone they arrest or take into custody for a medial check. ALWAYS. They just don't have the right to KEEP them. They can NOT keep them without a court order. Period.
(https://i.imgur.com/849PYIk.png)
In other words, you're throwing out a stinking red herring, because Trump explicitly talked about taking guns without due process and then following up with due process...
...and now you're saying that all you're talking about is due process.
How about sticking to the topic?
-
They just don't have the right to KEEP them. They can NOT keep them without a court order. Period.
Let's talk real world.
Do you know the rate at which citizens get their firearms properly returned to them?
I've worked in various law enforcement offices, including ranges and evidence/storage rooms. I've seen everything from antique muskets up to recoilless rifles sitting there. I've talked with multiple LEOs who've admitted that they make it very difficult for people to get their lawful arms back.
My brother is a detective who is disgusted by how this is handled many times. In fact, he's considering a run for sheriff next year and this is one thing we were just discussing last week that he'd like to reform.
Sure, in theory, it's great to let the government grab all the guns they want on a whim. But in reality, we need to be MUCH more cautious than you seem to want, before grabbing someone's guns.
-
I have a friend that tried to off himself with his lever action 30/30. This was 40 years ago,and his left arm is still a flipper. He had to get out of the hospital and off the pain pills to get his 30/30 back,but he still has it today,and he did NOT have to hire a lawyer. I just took him to the Sheriff's office and we asking him "when the hell is he going to get his rifle back?" after he got tired of asking the cop that responded to the shots fired call. He had it the next day.
And I'll take the reality of many over the anecdote of one.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/849PYIk.png)
In other words, you're throwing out a stinking red herring, because Trump explicitly talked about taking guns without due process and then following up with due process...
...and now you're saying that all you're talking about is due process.
How about sticking to the topic?
This thread has wandered like a high-speed drill bit on a sheet of steel plate. Wish I could knock it off my "Latest posts to me" page without going back and deleting all my post.
-
@roamer_1
Are you turning into a drama queen,too? What,you think some shrink is going to declare you a mental basket case while you are at home minding your own business,and authorize the cops to go get you?
Have you ever heard of a class of people called "Judges"? Or another class called "Lawyers"? The "lawyer" people LOVE to sue the hell out of city,state,and federal agencies because that's where the deep pockets and bad lawyers live.
@sneakypete
Yeah... All you missed is doctors and you'd have pretty well hit every sort I don't care much for.
-
@sneakypete
You said to me, "You also believe in Holy Spooks and all sorts of other foolish crap."
You are wasting "alphabet letters" and your "fingers" when you write such to me. You should know by now I don't respond to personal attacks; I don't have word fights with posters.
-
Sure, in theory, it's great to let the government grab all the guns they want on a whim. But in reality, we need to be MUCH more cautious than you seem to want, before grabbing someone's guns.
@Suppressed
WHERE have I or anyone else wrote any such thing?
-
@txradioguy
Are you REALLY so freaking dense you can't understand the difference between Hillary or Obomber and Trump? Both Bubbette! and Bathhouse Barry are life-long communists that have wanted the government to seize guns from citizens since they were teens.
Trump,on the other hand,owns guns,has a CCW permit in NYC,and has a personal history of being pro-gun.
What the HELL is the matter with you people? Are you so in love with the alleged Republican Party Usual Suspects for President that you have lost every bit of common sense? Up to this date Trump has been the most conservative president since Reagan,and all you clowns have done since day 1 is scream about "he's just like Hillary and Obama! WAAAAH! WAAAAH! WAAAH!"
Great post, @sneakypete ! :beer:
-
Yeah, no kidding. Ah, what the hell... We didn't really need that whole Rule of Law thing anyway.
Every single one of my libtard relatives tell me how much they don't like/ trust the police/ government, but now all of a sudden they want the cops and government being the only ones with guns. You can't make this shit up. My nephew (career Navy) actually told me:"No one needs an assault weapon with a high capacity magazine." Really how about the Korean shop keepers in L.A. during the Rodney King riots, or the guy in Texas that stopped the Church shooter that killed 20+ people, using the exact same weapon as the killer.
D@MN if someone is breaking into my house I want at least as much fire power as they have and 2 more magazines.
Seriously I really wish stupid burned.
-
Every single one of my libtard relatives tell me how much they don't like/ trust the police/ government, but now all of a sudden they want the cops and government being the only ones with guns. You can't make this shit up. My nephew (career Navy) actually told me:"No one needs an assault weapon with a high capacity magazine." Really how about the Korean shop keepers in L.A. during the Rodney King riots, or the guy in Texas that stopped the Church shooter that killed 20+ people, using the exact same weapon as the killer.
D@MN if someone is breaking into my house I want at least as much fire power as they have and 2 more magazines.
Seriously I really wish stupid burned.
Now here is a reason I am glad I have an AR. Just across the street the house bought by Chinese with cash was raided by SWAT just this week. Part of a 18 house Chinese Drug Cartel western WA bust hat was going on. 16 large boxes of pot they took out of there. We never knew this was going on. They were quite, kept to themselves, and the curtains never opened for the 3 years they lived there. It would explain the Uhaul truck they would sometimes park in the driveway with nothing going in or out of it....before midnight anyway.
-
I would like to add English Common Law and terriers to that list.
They can keep the D@MN Corgis. I hate those little B@$bleep.
-
This thread has wandered like a high-speed drill bit on a sheet of steel plate. Wish I could knock it off my "Latest posts to me" page without going back and deleting all my post.
Damn Sam, you know nothing stays on topic after the 4th page. It is some kinda interweb rule.
-
Damn Sam, you know nothing stays on topic after the 4th page. It is some kinda interweb rule.
Maybe we should lengthen the pages? Might improve the attention spans....
-
Maybe we should lengthen the pages? Might improve the attention spans....
40 years ago Nixon said the the Average Americans attention span was about as long as his d**k.
I believe with shrinkage it is much shorter today.
-
40 years ago Nixon said the the Average Americans attention span was about as long as his d**k.
I believe with shrinkage it is much shorter today.
Proof of this is when walking out of a great movie, a common complaint you'll hear being murmured is "It was too long."
At one time movies were epic events, some with intermissions.
Today, Americans want an epic movie to be about an hour and fifteen minutes.
Heck, don't get me started on church rules for sermon times being no more than 30 minutes.
-
Proof of this is when walking out of a great movie, a common complaint you'll hear being murmured is "It was too long."
At one time movies were epic events, some with intermissions.
Today, Americans want an epic movie to be about an hour and fifteen minutes.
Heck, don't get me started on church rules for sermon times being no more than 30 minutes.
Yeah remember the good old days when you had to make fire with two sticks. Ahhh those were the days.
-
Yeah remember the good old days when you had to make fire with two sticks. Ahhh those were the days.
I doubt most urban yutes have any clue that one can start a fire with two sticks.
They are limited to whatever App and video plays on their smartphones.
-
Looking back, we had, in the person of Teddy Roosevelt, the finest President in the history of this country. He had the spirit and determination that matched the times and the land. Then the women got the vote, and everything went to hell. While our boys was overseas fighting the Kaiser, the women got Prohibition put in. Drinking and gambling and whoring were declared unlawful. All those things which come natural to men became crimes. Now they want to take our guns away. Damn shame
-
I doubt most urban yutes have any clue that one can start a fire with two sticks.
They are limited to whatever App and video plays on their smartphones.
@INVAR
You blame the yute, I blame their parents and grandparents.
-
@INVAR
You blame the yute, I blame their parents and grandparents.
I blame Apple.
Let's sue them and get rich.
-
Looking back, we had, in the person of Teddy Roosevelt, the finest President in the history of this country. He had the spirit and determination that matched the times and the land. Then the women got the vote, and everything went to hell. While our boys was overseas fighting the Kaiser, the women got Prohibition put in. Drinking and gambling and whoring were declared unlawful. All those things which come natural to men became crimes. Now they want to take our guns away. Damn shame
@Wingnut
We're just asking for commonsense reasonable controls on the right for women to vote. Any reasonable person would agree.
its for public safety afterall
-
Looking back, we had, in the person of Teddy Roosevelt, the finest President in the history of this country. He had the spirit and determination that matched the times and the land. Then the women got the vote, and everything went to hell. While our boys was overseas fighting the Kaiser, the women got Prohibition put in. Drinking and gambling and whoring were declared unlawful. All those things which come natural to men became crimes. Now they want to take our guns away. Damn shame
You're cute when you're waxing poetic, Wingy.
-
You're cute when you're waxing poetic, Wingy.
I feel a roll coming on Darling!
-
We're just asking for commonsense reasonable controls on the right for women to vote. Any reasonable person would agree.
its for public safety afterall
Perfect!
Though we better be careful treading on that, @RoosGirl might come in here and give us boys a whuppin'.
-
Perfect!
Though we better be careful treading on that, @RoosGirl might come in here and give us boys a whuppin'.
And Jazzy! LMFAO
@driftdiver
-
Perfect!
Though we better be careful treading on that, @RoosGirl might come in here and give us boys a whuppin'.
@INVAR
heck those yankee girls aren't that tough
@RoosGirl
-
And Jazzy! LMFAO
@driftdiver
If I hear one more time that my firearms need to be insured for the damage they may cause, I think my head may actually explode.
I suppose, if it comes to that, I should insure my computer for the damages Jazzy's post may cause to my exploding head.
-
If I hear one more time that my firearms need to be insured for the damage they may cause, I think my head may actually explode.
I suppose, if it comes to that, I should insure my computer for the damages Jazzy's post may cause to my exploding head.
Why, "Any reasonable person would agree". Right?
-
And Jazzy! LMFAO
@driftdiver
A limp-wristed paintywaist who hides behind the black robes of judges and Mama gummint is not a person capable of whuppin' anyone but himself.
-
@INVAR
You blame the yute, I blame their parents and grandparents.
@driftdiver
Since when have youts listened to their parents or grandparents? Most don't even know who their fathers or grandfathers are.
-
@driftdiver
Since when have youts listened to their parents or grandparents? Most don't even know who their fathers or grandfathers are.
@sneakypete
And who's fault is that?
-
40 years ago Nixon said the the Average Americans attention span was about as long as his d**k.
I believe with shrinkage it is much shorter today.
Well, yeah, considering he croaked over 20 years ago I imagine the shrinkage is quite a lot. They say the soft tissue is the first to go.
-
Perfect!
Though we better be careful treading on that, @RoosGirl might come in here and give us boys a whuppin'.
What are talking about? I actually agree with @driftdiver on that one. All those squishy bitches should be locked at home and kept away from me. I really hate being around them when I take the kid to karate and it would make the odd trip to Joann much more pleasant.
-
@INVAR
heck those yankee girls aren't that tough
@RoosGirl
We shall duel with pistols at 15 paces tomorrow at dawn for your intolerable rudeness and personal slur against my good Southron upbringing.
-
Every single one of my libtard relatives tell me how much they don't like/ trust the police/ government, but now all of a sudden they want the cops and government being the only ones with guns. You can't make this shit up.
Such people are governed by fear. They do not have the wherewithal to take responsibility for their own defense, and ultimately want someone to blame. That is inevitably the genesis of their myopic sense of security.
My nephew (career Navy) actually told me:"No one needs an assault weapon with a high capacity magazine." Really how about the Korean shop keepers in L.A. during the Rodney King riots, or the guy in Texas that stopped the Church shooter that killed 20+ people, using the exact same weapon as the killer.
D@MN if someone is breaking into my house I want at least as much fire power as they have and 2 more magazines.
The more salient point: I WILL have more firepower than the evil doer as a matter of course, and regardless of the law. My natural right cannot be countered.
Seriously I really wish stupid burned.
Oh it does. It always does. Sometimes it takes a while to get to the combustion point.
And with stupid this deep and wide, it takes a long, long time... but when it goes, the conflagration will be of monumental proportions.
-
The more salient point: I WILL have more firepower than the evil doer as a matter of course, and regardless of the law. My natural right cannot be countered.
Oh it does. It always does. Sometimes it takes a while to get to the combustion point.
And with stupid this deep and wide, it takes a long, long time... but when it goes, the conflagration will be of monumental proportions.
Yes sir. This land of ours abounds in ruffians and varmints. Their numbers are legion, their evil skills commensurate.
-
What are talking about? I actually agree with @driftdiver on that one.
That we should employ Jazzy's logic by proposing commonsense reasonable controls on the right for women to vote?
And here I thought you would be putting us chauvinist pigs over your knee.
-
And with stupid this deep and wide, it takes a long, long time... but when it goes, the conflagration will be of monumental proportions.
It twill burn hot like magnesium.
Jazzy and his ilk have absolutely no idea what kind of disaster their insistent efforts will instigate.
-
Yes sir. This land of ours abounds in ruffians and varmints. Their numbers are legion, their evil skills commensurate.
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1JOFhfoAD4#)
-
That we should employ Jazzy's logic by proposing commonsense reasonable controls on the right for women to vote?
And here I thought you would be putting us chauvinist pigs over your knee.
I am attempting to not be my usual selfish fetishist and taking one for the team knowing that the plan would necessarily exclude Jazz from voting.
-
That we should employ Jazzy's logic by proposing commonsense reasonable controls on the right for women to vote?
And here I thought you would be putting us chauvinist pigs over your knee.
You wish!
-
I am attempting to not be my usual selfish fetishist and taking one for the team knowing that the plan would necessarily exclude Jazz from voting.
Your sacrifice will be noted in the annals of history. :patriot:
-
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1JOFhfoAD4#)
:beer:
There is a reward - for the righteous, courageous and the loyal. And that reward includes beer.
-
I am attempting to not be my usual selfish fetishist and taking one for the team knowing that the plan would necessarily exclude Jazz from voting.
You are such a sexist and racist meanie to your own gender!
-
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1JOFhfoAD4#)
I'd never seen that. It's great!
-
I feel a roll coming on Darling!
kaiser or Pistolet?
-
kaiser or Pistolet?
Crescent.
-
Crescent.
Are you sure? I always thought that Crescents were kind of...............flaky.
-
You are such a sexist and racist meanie to your own gender!
I'm an equal opportunity sexist and racist meanie. I pretty much hate everyone.
-
I'm an equal opportunity sexist and racist meanie. I pretty much hate everyone.
@RoosGirl
its mutual although if you're not careful that may change
-
Are you sure? I always thought that Crescents were kind of...............flaky.
Couldn't be any other way!
-
I'd never seen that. It's great!
Yeah... Toby does pretty good vids :)
:beer:
-
@RoosGirl
its mutual although if you're not careful that may change
@driftdiver
Pfft. I'm much too likable and pleasant for anyone to hate me.
-
@driftdiver
Pfft. I'm much too likable and pleasant for anyone to hate me.
Truedat.
-
@driftdiver
Pfft. I'm much too likable and pleasant for anyone to hate me.
@RoosGirl
I'll drink to that.
(https://brokensecrets.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/wine-cheers.jpg?w=455&h=303)
(you're too classy for measly beer . . . )
-
Truedat.
@Cyber Liberty
Me,too!
-
Yeah... Toby does pretty good vids :)
:beer:
The old boy, what's-his-name in that video ain't too bad, himself.
-
The old boy, what's-his-name in that video ain't too bad, himself.
Yep... Good ol Willie.
Just whatever you do:
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tJXjt5D4zY#)