NRA torches Biden admin for plan to change rules for gun buyers, sellers

Not sure about this one, I socialize some pretty politically diverse circles. I know quite a number of pro second amendment Democrats. I don't think they operate much online. But yeah they seem to be pretty vocal about it when you meet them in real life not in fictitious cyberspace land but that's where people are 100% id

 

if you are afraid you will commit suicide with a gun-don't own one.
The studies Mother Jones cites work this way
the anti gun academics study people who have committed crimes or suicides with guns and pretend they are representative of other gun owners. They neglect to tell you things such as living alone, renting etc are more likely to contribute to suicides. They ignore that many of the problems with guns are committed by people with substance abuse, domestic violence or criminal histories. it's worthless

 

Lots of dems own guns but not at nearly the levels of republicans. Many dems own guns but don't think "common folk" should. Or they own guns but are willing to sacrifice gun rights if doing so helps advance the cause of the alphabet agenda, abortion rights, environmental extremism etc

 

Automatic. This from Bing:

"The law in the United States for registering automatic weapons is complex and varies by state. In general, there are two levels of regulation: federal and state.

At the federal level, the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) imposes an excise tax and a registration requirement on certain firearms, including machine guns. However, the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) banned the private sale and ownership of any machine guns that were not already registered before May 20, 1986. Therefore, only machine guns that were registered before that date are legal to own, and they are subject to strict rules and background checks.

At the state level, some states have passed laws that completely ban the possession, manufacture, or sale of all machine guns, regardless of federal registration. These states are California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. Other states have partial bans or restrictions on machine guns, such as requiring a state license or permit, or limiting the types or models of machine guns that are allowed. Some states have no additional regulations on machine guns beyond the federal law.

Therefore, the legality of owning a machine gun in the United States depends on the date of registration, the state of residence, and the compliance with federal and state laws. Machine guns are not completely illegal, but they are highly regulated and very rare."​

 

Now, you're against abortion rights for women? You equate abortion rights with environmental extremism?

 

This is the case.

And you defend a system that allows them to arm themselves without the slightest restriction.

 

I support abortion in many cases. I know gun owning democrats -often women-who will vote for an anti gun politician because that politician supports abortion on demand. Abortion rights, union power.,, income redistribution, the alphabet agenda, etc are all leftwing issues that are usually championed by anti gun politicians

 

really? I support laws that prevent violent felons from having guns. same with fugitives. I don't think someone not old enough to vote should be able to carry firearms in public places. I don' t think people who are stoned or drunk should be carrying firearms. so much for your erroneous claims

 

Full auto machine gun is different than a automatic, and yes they "mine" are all registered with the ATF, ICE and the FBI.

I guess I'm not getting your point..

 

That's good.

But they're not the ones going into schools and slaughtering children, or shooting concert-goers or co-workers.

What do you do about them?

Is there nothing you can do about it?

 

well in a free society you cannot punish people who haven't done anything illegal yet

I am not the one who disarms adults working in schools-that's the left
I don't create gun free zones-that's the left
I don't coddle people who have engaged in violence prior to them murdering others-that's the left

 

Only 20% of teachers believe that carrying a gun will make school safer.

https://www.rand.org/news/press/2023/05/31.html

All Republican conventions and all public places where the POTUS appears are gun free zones.

Why are they?

 

most teachers are Democrats. At Republican conventions there are tons of armed guards. I don' have problems with not being able to carry in courthouses, or police stations either because I know there are plenty of people with firearms who will protect me in the case of criminal attack. It is the secret service who issues those rules. That's a big difference from gun free zones

 

What contempt.

Who are you to judge someone who refuses a gun in the workplace... with children.

Ignorant and contemptuous.

Typical pro 2A.

No connection.

More guns = safer place.

No ?

Then why do Conservatives allow their conventions to be gun-free zones?

 

I have contempt for democrats who create gun free zones where killers can slay children-unchallenged.
And i find it ironic that you call me ignorant. Nothing you have ever posted on this subject suggests you have any training or experience in this area. The teachers' unions are the biggest single contributor to the Democrats.

 

But there it is--a permit is required for automatic weapons.

The idea we can carry weapons whenever and wherever, no restrictions, seemingly close the position taken by a number of gun owners, may not be sustainable in what is predominantly an urban society.

 

Probably not, but what difference would it make if they are?

 

Yet another example of dictator Joe just completely trashing the Constitution in his slimy little Weasley ways to try to work around it

 

It's literally written law!

The difference, however, is now hundreds of thousands of people have lost their lives from this epidemic.

And yes we can slow the flow.. the vast majority of fentanyl is coming from our Southern border and our Southern border is as lose as a Kardashian slumber party.

Simple really.. the left is not only condoning the mental health crisis... they are actually exacerbating it by affirming transgenderism and unable to define a women.

However, in fairness, it was the republicans that started the closure of mental health institutions in this nation. There needs to be a hard reversal on this ideology, as mental health in this nation is at a crisis point.

Me personally, I am pro-choice and totally disagree with states that totally ban abortion. Democrats, however, had an opportunity, controlling both houses and the presidency, to codify women's abortion rights. There is a reason they didn't.... and that is because it's now a decisive tool used to win elections. Democrats are kings of twisting liberal emotions.

 

You mention the prelude (first) portion of the Second, and that is where many people try to change the meaning of the second, or misinterpret it. If I may, let me offer a clarification.

The "Militia" is a defense force assembled from the people. At the beginning of the Civil war, the Union army was greatly outnumbered by the army of the Confederacy. President Lincoln called on the people to form militias and help defend the Union. In a matter of weeks, the number of defenders of the union more than doubled. The government did not have the time or the money to draft, equip, and train troops- but the militia units came already armed; skilled riflemen and hunters, many mounted. They usually elected their officers from their own ranks, decided on uniforms usually made by family or local sources, organized themselves, and reported as units, ready to fight. My family has a printed roster from a militia in Pennsylvania that one of our ancestors was part of. Thus the militias literally were the resource that allowed the Union to survive. In order to have that resource available, the people must be armed and familiar with their arms. This in no way authorizes any criminal or abusive use of weapons.

I have a close friend who has been a district court judge for decades, and we often talk about the justice system. He once told me this:

"The best regulator is the Self-regulator. If everybody self-regulated with reasonable values, we wouldn't need laws. But some people will not, and we must have laws to regulate their behavior".
He's saying we could all get along- if we all held reasonable core values and didn't violate the common freedoms that every honorable person understands. Until we have that, the ability to defend against those who would violate us requires the ability to defend yourself- and your nation.
Thus, "A well regulated Militia" (regulated meaning they report to authority and follow orders) is necessary to the security of a free state. In order for that resource to be available when it's needed, the people must already be armed and competent in the use of arms. The founding fathers understood this, and created that capacity to ensure the nation would have that huge reserve force available if needed.

While some will argue that armed civilians would have no chance against an army and military weapons- and that would be true, IF the tactics were the same on both sides. Ask why Russia failed to get control in Afghanistan in 10 years, and gave up. We didn't learn from that, it took us 20.... a modern army, fighting poorly armed, effectively rabble, militia style forces. Of course, they are better armed now, because our clumsy withdrawel left them billions in sophisticated American equipment.

I agree that there needs to be a balancing point. That is why we have allowed the many limitations that have been imposed in conflict with the Second Amendment. The question is- When is that enough?
The issue is that for some people, enough is the total disarmament of the people, the destruction of the ability to defend, and becoming totally reliant on the integrity of politicians.

I think anyone who would trust their lives to the integrity of politicians is functionally brain-dead. History proves that power corrupts- and that a counter-balance to that corruption is vital to a free nation.

 

It means their members generally are indoctrinated to oppose stuff the GOP supports
https://www.opensecrets.org/industr...e than most labor,1990, where our data begins.

Teachers unions have steadily amped up their political involvement: From 2004 to 2016, their donations grew from $4.3 million to more than $32 million -- an all-time high. Even more than most labor unions, they have little use for Republicans, giving Democrats at least 94 percent of the funds they contributed to candidates and parties since as far back as 1990, where our data begins.

Two organizations account for practically all of the contributions made by teachers unions: The National Education Association (about $20 million in 2016) and the American Federation of Teachers (almost $12 million). Both groups -- which compete for members, but also collaborate with each other through the NEA-AFT Partnership -- are consistently among the organizations that contribute the most money to candidates and political groups. [Read more Background]

 

how many Gun owners think people ought to be able to carry guns into jails or courthouses or military bases without permission. I bet almost none

 

It hasn't been done yet. SCOTUS may not wish to use its ammo on the National Firearms Act.

 

No. There isn't.
Why do you think the requirement to obtain a federal permit to own a gun will pass the Bruen test?

Straw, man.

 

How about supporting abortion rights because a woman should be the one decide whether or not she bears children?

It's a choice. I happen to see abortion rights as more important than gun rights, but that doesn't stop me from telling a pro-choice pol I won't vote for them if they push gun grabbing.

Abortion rights are not a leftwing issue.

The government should be neutral regarding unions. Workers have every right to withdraw their services as a group.

Are you opposed to measures that have arguably tip the scale toward a larger return to capital, resulting in this...



Income redistribution may be necessary even if we take our thumb off the scale against workers. AI will replace a lot of jobs.