RobG
Well-known member
What do you mean by "take our guns"? Are you suggesting if we had a Dem controlled president, congress, and supreme court we wouldn't be able to own firearms?
Donald trump Jr on Jay Scott podcast
- Thread starter Oneye
- Start date
- Status
JWP58
Banned
Two things I could not do before Obama entered the WO.
Carry an unlocked firearm in national parks and carry a gun on a train as checked baggage.
Not earth shattering, but more gun rights were granted than were taken away in the last 7 years.
By the way, I may have missed some rights taken away, so feel free to call me out on it.
And no other president has pushed through as many executive orders, some of which were aimed at "gun control" (albeit pandering mostly to the uninformed liberal).
They are all crooks, and Mr. Obama is included in that group. He bitched and moaned about not appointing a justice when the Crook in charge Bush was on his way out...yet its different when he's commander and thief.
Here's a right that was taken away, freedom to not have health insurance. The Obama administration intentionally mislead the people in regards to their health care mandate, which only benefits insurance providers.
How about Obama phones? Why should I be forced to pay for some dope dealers phone? or phoneS? Shouldn't I have a right to opt out of providing such services to people who produce nothing for our society?
All for the greater good im sure. Or here's another one, why has the Obama administration ordered ICE and BP to stop doing their jobs? Isnt protection one of the few responsibilities of the Federal Government? If they aren't controlling the borders, are we truly a sovereign nation?
Yeah. No.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/every-presidents-executive-actions-in-one-chart/
Your right to not have health insurance made my right to have health insurance super expensive. While I'm not a fan of the individual mandate and would prefer single-payer, the fact is that Robert's court uphelp the individual mandate as constitutional, so, in essence, it wasn't a right.
Yeah. No: http://www.freegovernmentcellphones.net/faq/obama-phone
jryoung
Well-known member
Havre does have a train station.
Attachments
MinnesotaHunter
Well-known member
Ben, not saying you are wrong, but a website whose whole purpose is to promote and help people get government cellphones might not be the best source of info to support your argument.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Ben, not saying you are wrong, but a website whose whole purpose is to promote and help people get government cellphones might not be the best source of info to support your argument.
Alrighty then, let's do this...http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...-some-illegal-immigrant-families-smartphones/
Ben, not saying you are wrong, but a website whose whole purpose is to promote and help people get government cellphones might not be the best source of info to support your argument.
Fair point.
My point was that the program was started under Clinton in 96, and expanded under Bush in 2008 to include smart phones.
At any time, congress could have eliminated that program, but they haven't. We live in a digital world. Even the poor need to have access to the internet to send in resumes, pay bills, etc.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
brietbart? Was Nazi Times not loading?
..thot I had treehouse in my faves...but no
I prefer to get my news from the Jade Helm blogosphere.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
...from Huma Weiner's lips to your ears.
That sir, is comedy gold. Well played.
Washington Hunter
Well-known member
Democrats don't want more gun control? Is that what I'm hearing some of you say? What about what Obama said after the San Bernadino shooting, by Islamic terrorists? The first thing out of his mouth was that we need stricter gun control regulations. He wouldn't admit that this was done by terrorists, he only wanted to blame it on the guns. And Hillary wants to continue with the exact same train of thought. Why would anyone want another 4 years, or 8 years of Obama? That's what we'll get with Hillary. Although I'm hopeful that in the end she won't be allowed to run due to the crimes she has committed which are currently being investigated by the FBI.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
NO, it's not. Unfortunately political ideological focus too often degrades reading comprehension.
I think most would agree with you that high powered Democrats have advocated for increased gun control for many decades, but with only limited success. But the contrast presented is with the high powered Republican pledge to transfer / sell public lands. That same pledge also a Republican platform plank nationally and in some states seems to be gathering momentum with every Cruz speech..
The debate has involved the fact that the Dems have not been successful, while the Repubs seem to be gaining momentum toward disposing of our public lands. I only hope that the NRA fear invoking mantra about Dems taking our guns and the sportsmen mantra about losing places to hunt and recreate due to transfer of federal public lands both never come to fruition.
Two things I could not do before Obama entered the WO.
Carry an unlocked firearm in national parks and carry a gun on a train as checked baggage.
Not earth shattering, but more gun rights were granted than were taken away in the last 7 years.
By the way, I may have missed some rights taken away, so feel free to call me out on it.
Are you trying to say that the current president has been a gun rights advocate, and denying that he hasn't attempted to implement gun control? From his own mouth, failure to enact gun control legislation has been one of the biggest disappointments of his presidency.
As I said, no meaningful legislation has passed that has had an effect on rights/ownership, that is not from lack of effort. There have been bills on what types of guns you can own, what type of ammo you can own, how many bullets your gun can contain, what appearance it may have. There is constant chatter of 'universal' background checks, which would require you to ask the Fed's permission and pay an FFL for a BGC to inherit a 50 year old hunting rifle from your dad, or to loan one to a friend. This same system of checks would require a registration database to be enforceable.
If you support this, own it. Proudly and boldly proclaim that you support it.
To deny that these stances exist is disingenuous, to put it kindly .
Except Miller. He'll have you think that when the president toured the nation on AirForce 1 after Sandy Hook 'campaigning' that it was to expand your carry rights in parks and on trains.
As for the NRA, they obnoxiously call me daily. The last two times I have actually answered, and told them no more $ until they clear up their land transfer position. Of course, I know their callers are just paid robots, but there is little response from them on that topic.
belly-deep
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 3,459
In the technical sense, yes we'd probably be "able" to. But it they would make it so painful, both financially and procedurally that most wouldn't. Democrats of varying forms have put forth all kinds of ideas over the years, from limits on the number of guns you can own or buy to extremely high taxes on bullets to fingerprint ID etc. In many places you already have to demonstrate a viable "need" for getting a permit. There is no doubt in my mind that it is possible to legislate a "right" to death for all practical purposes.
belly-deep
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 3,459
Okay
Show me where in the article it says they have to present more than one form of ID? Not to mentions several of the refugees have been caught in Europe with fake passports.
JWP58
Banned
Actually no it didn't, since im not an illegal that gets healthcare under a fake name and walks out of the E.R. never to pay again. I am a healthy relatively young person, that contributes to society (ie has a job and pays taxes, unlike the majority that voted for Obummer), who should not be forced to subsidize obese, unfit, slobs. But hey, for the greater good right? Why should I be forced to pay for some slob that 100lbs over weight and lives off of Cheetos and pepsi????? It just wouldn't be fair, would it?
And thanks for not challenging the fact that Obama's admin has completely hamstrung ICE and BP. Hell ICE wont even show up to a jail for a ice hold anymore thanks to the Obama admin's agenda to completely sweep illegal immigration under the rug and look the other way.
If they are going to do that, why wouldn't they make an effort to improve Mexico as a whole to slow illegal immigration? Why wouldn't they cut foreign aid to countries across oceans and send that money to Mexico, who we obviously have a vested interest in?
Who knows why, I guess the bleeding heart liberals don't get misty over Mexico and their issues. Just some guy named Kony in a far away land called Africa.
I hope anyone but Curz, Rubio, Hitlery, or Uncle Bernie gets elected. But Im sure i'll be disappointed, and more of my paycheck will be stolen from me one way or another in the next 4 years....for the greater good!
Last edited:
- Status
