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

"Not the age discrimination act dude. Age discrimination as a constitutional concept. You know, like racial discrimination in writing a law? You know like "blacks can't do X or blacks must be subjected to Y process that whites are not"? Same thing, but with "over X age you must be subjected to Y process". Age is a protected class, like race or sex or religion.

This is why I keep telling you and other posters not to use AI to farm out your learning. You don't learn anything, and you cite the wrong **** wasting everyone's ****ing time.
READ. FOR. YOURSELF.":
^ This indeed refers you to a legal concept, since you went and binged something no one asked you of. I wasn't talking about employment law, I was talking about laws which are intrinsically discriminatory and have to pass heightened levels of scrutiny. Age discrimination is one of those. Others are race, sex, religion, etc.


I suppose you're in support of voting tests?

 

Without a formal process is a direct quote of you dude. Own it or don't, we can all still see it there ffs.

 

They openly claim gang affiliation, and communicate on devices the federal government can get warrantless access to.

You want a use for AI? Scrape social media for people using specific keywords, displaying specific items or hand signs. Have the reports checked over by real persons and sorted by gang.
Warrantlessly tap their phones, target the key players for surveillance and stings, secure a sure conviction and evidence of affiliation and conspiracy, round up the lot and punish them for each other's crimes, stacked consecutively rather than concurrently.

This is already the process they could apply, without need for new laws.
Whether or not warrentless wiretaps are constitutional, they are able to do them and still do.

 

I think such a person has a right to procedural and substantive due process and so cannot be yanked up by their shorthairs based on simple age discrimination and made to petition to keep their rights.
There already exists a process to divest such persons of rights, and you won't go through with it.
You want to set up a system which makes anyone over a certain age report and justify their continued existence as a person rather than an object. That's tyranny.
Use the existing process which requires specific cause against a person to initiate. Cause that is not based on discrimination based on a protected class.

 

Subjecting people to testing for a right based on protected class status, is unconstitutional.

DMV = Driving. Driving = privilege. Rights are not privileges and cannot be treated as such.

 

Being subject to mandatory reporting and testing for the privilege of continuing to have a right based on protected class status is unconstitutional.
Being made to report is to be seized under the 4th amendment. You need cause for that, and being old ain't that.

 

What else did I say? You can OWN a car you just can't drive it on public roads. See how that works friend?

Super duper.

See Bruen.

It very much does make sense, you're just asserting the ostrich defense.

 

Requiring someone to test for a right based on protected class status is unconstitutional.

 

Yeah I do. Things are what they are, whether or not you pronounce on them, if the rule is a logical rule IE rule of law.

If its just "I want this so I say it says this" then a thing is not unconstitutional at all when pronounced upon, its simply rule by men rather than rule of law.

We have rule of law here, which means logical rules of construction (for example: It means what it meant when written, not what people might prefer now)

 

He admits it.

 

Yes, it does get tiresome having to correct you over and over.
There is no right to drive, its a privilege. There IS a right to keep and bear arms.

 

It's the key to political discontent we see in white lower- and middle-income wage earners. They're expecting you to fix the problem. They think Donald John Trump wants to save them.

The return to capital is increasing relative to the return to labor. Do you know why? Hint: technology is only part of why.

Your MAGA friends want you to increase the return to labor. How do you prevent capital from shifting to somewhere else if you give MAGA whites a larger share? There is an answer in the short term, say the next three decades, but by then the productivity of capital will be so great it won't even be worth training workers for many jobs, even if workers are prepared to work for free.

Do you understand? What will we do with billions of unneeded hands and mouths? For now, we can give your MAGA pals what they want and keep capital investment here. This is when we have to begin transitioning, however, to when 2024 solutions are unworkable.

We're not determining a "just wage." If you can't figure out how to fix workers' static and declining real incomes, you should get out of the way of those who can. The (white) "natives are restless and you won't placate them with Trump rhetoric covering for Paul Ryan like policies.

Because you don't have answers. The problems are rather obvious.

You may understand technology, but you don't seem to appreciate the impact of economics.

 

I'm taking political positions based on the sensibilities of our society. If you keep reaching for the brass ring of "everything I want," you're going to experience what Republicans did in 1930 and 1932 when their majority was replaced by more than a half-century of Democratic rule.

 

I'm well aware of the law and have proven that many times. You're grandstanding for MAGA morons.

 

You're going to find yourself with far fewer gun rights as an increasingly urbanized society goes for gun control measures proposed by the left. It may not happen in your lifetime; it will be your legacy.

 

The NRA continues to facilitate daily carnage on American streets, so they need to 'torch' themselves before they complain about planned rule changes intended to save lives.

 

You're deflecting ... why would they take government candy from the mouths of the people they're trying to make dependent?

 

So, you think 25% of folks jus' up and 'cided to quit working in 1930-32?

Are you targeting the gullible with stuff?

 

Are you okay?

 

WW2 ended the Depression.

 

We already have the power to commit people. Unconstitutional? No.

Theft? Taxes to run the program? I think you MAGA types have fallen into the deep end.

 

If you want them to have a different impression, you'll have to convince them there's no similarity.

 

Some MAGA don't vote for Trump.

 

A voluntary license that comes with benefits--no background checks, for example?

 

So, you realize liquor is sold in National Parks? "Progress!" I say. "Real Progress."