Lindsey Graham: Democrats, GOP Can ‘Come Together’ for Gun Confiscation Law

[Right_in_Virginia]

Lindsey Graham: Democrats, GOP Can ‘Come Together’ for Gun Confiscation Law
Breitbart, Mar 9, 2019

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) says firearm confiscation laws portend a way that Democrats and Republicans can “come together.”

CNN reported that Graham has long supported red flag laws, which allow a court to issue firearm confiscation orders for individuals deemed a threat to themselves or others.

House Democrats have already passed legislation during this Congress to criminalize private gun sales and extend the instant background check for firearm purchases. They are now pressing for $50 million in annual funding to bring academia into the gun control push.

The Democrats have also been vocal in their support for gun confiscation laws, and this is where Graham believes the left and right can come together.
 
He told CNN, “I haven’t really looked at the House package, but this is to me the area where we can come together.” Graham has scheduled a March 26 Judiciary Committee hearing on the confiscation orders.


More:  https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/03/09/lindsey-graham-democrats-gop-can-come-together-for-gun-confiscation-law/

[Elderberry]

And here I thought " a Red Flag Law" meant you had to use a Chamber Safe Flag when you went to the range.

[LegalAmerican]

I am still nervous about Graham...Don't trust him, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul....

[DCPatriot]

Would 'Founding Fathers' of a Republic such as the United States of America have 'The Right to Bear Arms...shall not be infringed" if it were written today?

Ask because it is right up there after 'Freedom of Speech' and the Right to Assembly, etc..

I agree some people are in a mental state that suggests they not have access to firearms.  But that requires a register.  A list.

I'm against any list maintained by a government.

[roamer_1]

How's everybody liking Gramesty 2.0 NOW???

Suckers.
And Tumpy would sign it.

[roamer_1]

I agree some people are in a mental state that suggests they not have access to firearms.  But that requires a register.  A list.

I'm against any list maintained by a government.

No, That requires a decider. and a ruleset without evidence.

I guarantee my ex would have taken my guns away just for spite.

And then, how does one go about getting them back?
A shrink?

ROTFLMAO!!!

[DCPatriot]

No, That requires a decider. and a ruleset without evidence.

I guarantee my ex would have taken my guns away just for spite.

And then, how does one go about getting them back?
A shrink?

ROTFLMAO!!!

Here's a thought.

They could suddenly declare that anybody who is taking or has taken within the last 5 years, any anxiety prescription, shall not be allowed to own firearms.

That's a healthy percentage of seniors...the most patriotic and Constitution-loving group.

[roamer_1]

Here's a thought.

They could suddenly declare that anybody who is taking or has taken within the last 5 years, any anxiety prescription, shall not be allowed to own firearms.

That's a healthy percentage of seniors...the most patriotic and Constitution-loving group.

And how easy is it to hang a vet with a PTSD diagnoses?

[jpsb]

How's everybody liking Gramesty 2.0 NOW???

Suckers.
And Tumpy would sign it.

Let me know when Trump does sign it. Until then you are just full of BS.

[Chosen Daughter]

Let me know when Trump does sign it. Until then you are just full of BS.

What's going to happen if he does?  Are you going to call Trump out on it?

Graham is a weasel.

[roamer_1]

Let me know when Trump does sign it. Until then you are just full of BS.

He's on the record.

And tell me, who was it that signed in the bumpstock ban???

Suckers.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Once again the 2nd Amendment folks are not making an argument that resonates with half of the nation, including half of Republicans in the Senate.  The other side sounds reasonable, even caring.  On a good day we sound like throwbacks to the wild, wild West.

The younger generation does not have a lick of understanding when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and why it was included in the Constitution.  They know only the Columbines.

Nor do they have any understanding of what has happened after "first they came for your guns, and then your treasure". 

Are there no organizations, no historians, no YouTube gurus to show these "kids" the fire they are playing with?

[roamer_1]

On a good day we sound like throwbacks to the wild, wild West.

Are there no organizations, no historians, no YouTube gurus to show these "kids" the fire they are playing with?

Sure @Right_in_Virginia ... Those 'throwbacks' you are talking about have been preaching it all along. You know, Conservatives. Maybe if your compatriots were more inclined toward the principles you say you stand for, you would not be so willing to run them over in such a ham-handed fashion, standing in our way.

The organization that SHOULD be leading the way politically is the Republican party. The silence is deafening.

Liberalism is not winning by merit. It has no merit.
It is winning because it has no opposition.

That is why I am no longer Republican.

[Wingnut]

Language of the Gun Grabbers.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Once again the 2nd Amendment folks are not making an argument that resonates with half of the nation, including half of Republicans in the Senate.  The other side sounds reasonable, even caring.  On a good day we sound like throwbacks to the wild, wild West.

The younger generation does not have a lick of understanding when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and why it was included in the Constitution.  They know only the Columbines.

Nor do they have any understanding of what has happened after "first they came for your guns, and then your treasure". 

Are there no organizations, no historians, no YouTube gurus to show these "kids" the fire they are playing with?

That was a great post.  I don't know the solution but understanding the problem is the first step.

[skeeter]

Once again the 2nd Amendment folks are not making an argument that resonates with half of the nation, including half of Republicans in the Senate.  The other side sounds reasonable, even caring.  On a good day we sound like throwbacks to the wild, wild West.

The younger generation does not have a lick of understanding when it comes to the 2nd Amendment and why it was included in the Constitution.  They know only the Columbines.

Nor do they have any understanding of what has happened after "first they came for your guns, and then your treasure". 

Are there no organizations, no historians, no YouTube gurus to show these "kids" the fire they are playing with?

Change the phrase '2A' to illegal immigration, abortion, hell socialism in general and you could say exactly the same thing. Naturally any argument for the traditional sounds anachronistic to the more progressive 50%.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Sure @Right_in_Virginia ... Those 'throwbacks' you are talking about have been preaching it all along. You know, Conservatives.

It's not working with the younger generations @roamer_1   You need a communications specialist. 

This is one instance where one is entitled to beat the messenger.

[Cyber Liberty]

Change the phrase '2A' to illegal immigration, abortion, hell socialism in general and you could say exactly the same thing. Naturally any argument for the traditional sounds anachronistic to the more progressive 50%.

It's all about the feewings.  The Millennials are so dumbed down about politics they are easy pickings for emotional arguments, and their untrained minds are quick to reject any logical arguments that conflict with the emotional.

Is it worse than historically?  I don't know.

[roamer_1]

It's not working with the younger generations @roamer_1   You need a communications specialist. 

This is one instance where one is entitled to beat the messenger.

No, @Right_in_Virginia , we need a political party that actually tries to engage and defend the principles of Conservatism.

[Right_in_Virginia]

No, @Right_in_Virginia , we need a political party that actually tries to engage and defend the principles of Conservatism.

We actually agree @roamer_1 .  We do need a third party to take over conservative messaging.  In the last 30 years conservatives---for all their talking and talking and talking --- have accomplished jack shit bringing new voters into the fold.  They've actually lost voters.

We need to start by tagging the principles with a new label.

[edpc]

And how easy is it to hang a vet with a PTSD diagnoses?

They’ve already alluded to this, a decade ago. Anyone remember the ‘right wing extremist’ report released under the Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano DHS? See page 2 of the document.

(U//FOUO) The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.

https://fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf

[Right_in_Virginia]

Change the phrase '2A' to illegal immigration, abortion, hell socialism in general and you could say exactly the same thing. Naturally any argument for the traditional sounds anachronistic to the more progressive 50%.

I agree @skeeter  And this is the "challenge" before us.  But we've got to at least try.  Use Venezuela .... with more than just words.  If memory serves, after 911 the Bush administration reached out to Hollywood writers to help come up with potential new attack scenarios.  Maybe we need to do the same....(I'd go the Christian filmmaker route  ) but for help with messaging, history and especially short video clips. 

This election may well be the last chance we'll get to grab these kids before they and their worldview become the majority.

[sneakypete]

No, @Right_in_Virginia , we need a political party that actually tries to engage and defend the principles of Conservatism.

@roamer_1

And we should start by describing the 2nd Amendment as a fundamental aspect of a free people,instead of calling it "conservative".  Right or wrong,the word "conservative" leaves a dirt ring in the ears of most people under 50 because they have been trained to think all their lives that conservatives want slavery and the freedom to murder anyone they want at any time without question.

We need to remind the people that it was the LIBERAL Founding Fathers who thought that individual freedoms were so important that the prime tools necessary to insure a free people could remain free,instead of being disarmed and becoming servants of the government.

Meanwhile,the word "liberal" means you are open-minded,fair,and loving. Which is why I NEVER refer to a leftist as a "liberal". Just because they stole and misuse that word for propaganda reasons doesn't mean I am required to help them sell their lie.

[MajorClay]

Did I just read this headline correctly???

[libertybele]

No, @Right_in_Virginia , we need a political party that actually tries to engage and defend the principles of Conservatism.

Agreed.