Really punch??? Under Clinton???
Printable View
Really punch??? Under Clinton???
Gang violence from Chicago spilling out of that shithole to many other parts of the country during the ‘30’s. The AR is the Tommy Gun of today.Quote:
Originally Posted by timshufflin
Who was President that signed 1986 The Firearms Owners Protection Act that took away auto weapons? Who was the President who sent a personal letter in 1991 ? To two congressmen asking them to Vote for the 1994 assault weapons BAN. By the way the ban only passed by 2 votes 216-214. What president thought we should have a 7 day waiting period on ANY handgun sale? What President sent a personal letter to be read at the 1994 congress before the assault weapons ban became LAW? (Ronald Reagan) .. But we conservatives think he was a god!!! Who was the first governor to make abortion legal ANYWHERE in the United states. His nickname was Rawhide!! So Trump is a piece of CRAP now. Well then Friends RONALD REAGAN is far worse!!!
But I do agree with Shuff, We live in world NOW where LIBERAL turds aren't the same as in the 80's .. If they start banning this or that!! Will they ever stop!!! The answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Yup. The Republicans would have blocked it at every turn. Under cheeto-head I'll bet we lose the midterms. So we'll have a new york liberal President and a democratic Congress. Just a prediction.Quote:
Originally Posted by toolman
I am officially pissed off. There had better be a rabbit coming out of the damn hat.
Yes Sir and this is a Truth. PunchtheClown and I often talk about this. If you get a "republican" in office and it gets a gun control bug up its arse you are doomed. The dems jump up and down in glee to put gun control before it and the "republicans" go along with it because hey, "if a republican wants gun control, it's no longer gun control." reagan has a lot in common with trump. Both reagan and trump came from libtard lala land. Neither truly had the 2nd Amendment in their mind as a "legitimate" part of the Constitution. I guess neither of them looked up the word "infringe" either.Quote:
Originally Posted by toolman
If you ever listen to Mark Levin, he savages both of these guys for their failures on the 2nd Amendment.
I do not have to admit it. If I cannot have a bump stock because it is an accessory then what else on a firearm can be called an accessory? Hmm, magazines come to mind. One word keeps coming back to me, INFRINGE. A full auto weapon is an ARM. If you say that I cannot have a firearm the way it was designed to be made, my rights have been infringed.Quote:
Originally Posted by toolman
https://www.impactguns.com/magazine-accessories.aspx
https://www.sportsmansguide.com/prod...121&c=121&s=20
https://grabagun.com/magazines/magaz...cessories.html
https://www.ammoland.com/2015/03/top...#axzz58Uc4NMPS
https://www.dickssportinggoods.com/f...un-accessories
As you all can see from my above post. We have many many gun companies calling magazines, accessories. How do most auto loaders and some bolt guns run without this "accessory"? This battle is already being waged in the assault weapons ban. They want those magazines limited in round count.
Here's a flow chart for a few things:
1. progressives call a magazine an accessory and so do many of our own vendors.
2. We allow the outlaw of a bump stock because it's an accessory and not an "arm".
3. If a magazine is an accessory and we say that bump stocks are as well, the slippery slope starts.
4. We can then limit the magazine accessory to the round count progressives want. This have been done in several states. This was also done under the assault weapons ban.
5. If you can limit the round count in a magazine to 10 rounds then why not 8? How about 5? How about 3? How about 1?
6. If you can limit the round count, why not just make the magazine illegal just like the bump stock so that we all get a single shot ruger or thompson?
Age limits
1. 18 years old is the age of majority to vote and sign a contract. An argument can be made that since this is true then 18 is age in which you can buy a firearm.
2. Our government makes law saying that 18 year old adults who can sign contracts, get married, vote, can now NOT buy a firearm until they are 21.
3. With that law we are now saying that the age of majority does not matter when it comes to buying a firearm.
4. If your being of the age of majority does not matter and the age was set at 21 today then why not 24 tomorrow? It's an arbitrary number. How about 27? How about 30?
Between Columbine and the Florida shooting there was exactly one mass shooter under 21. That shooter did not buy their firearm, he took it from their mother. This means that passing a 21 year old age limit would have THEORETICALLY stopped only the Florida shooter. Uhm, NO. All of us know that if that little punk couldn't have purchased that rifle it would have gotten it another way.
We are rolling over on this background check crap. We are allowing ourselves to have to jump through hoops, be tracked, be catalogued, just because someone else committed a crime.
Do we all see how nuts this crap is? Allowing a scenario where if someone else breaks the law then the rest of us will loose our rights? This is NUTS!
For your guys wife sake. I hope you all are this passionate in bed! Peace toolman
If this is the case are all debts accrued by someone before they are 21 forgiven? Are 20.9999 year olds tried as juveniles? I can do this all day.