2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[preakness]

I enjoy the people that try to get others banned

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by free2131

The 2A was written when all we had were muskets and canons. Had the framers known what kinds of wonderful weapons of war man could create, I think they would have been a bit more clear as to what kind of arms we could bear.

I've always seen this response. It's assumed these men weren't bright or couldn't think ahead. Throughout their lives and their knowledge of past history they've seen weapons become more powerful and change. I have seen the same and always think of what is the next crazy weapon humans will produce. If something was written today, would we not consider the future either?

[Cavaliercards]

There there.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

If something was written today, would we not consider the future either?

It seems like the average attention span is 60 seconds. You really think laws that are passed are done so with any thought about how th....Jesus did you guys see the yabos on NatBornKillers avatar????

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

I've always seen this response. It's assumed these men weren't bright or couldn't think ahead. Throughout their lives and their knowledge of past history they've seen weapons become more powerful and change. I have seen the same and always think of what is the next crazy weapon humans will produce. If something was written today, would we not consider the future either?

Well, if they were so forward thinking, why didn't the Founders come up with "Star Wars"?

But seriously, Sibes, you're a deeper thinker than I gave you credit for being.

Unblocked.

[preakness]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

I've always seen this response. It's assumed these men weren't bright or couldn't think ahead. Throughout their lives and their knowledge of past history they've seen weapons become more powerful and change. I have seen the same and always think of what is the next crazy weapon humans will produce. If something was written today, would we not consider the future either?

I really don't think they envisioned the kind of assault weapons available today. If they could have, they would have been invented

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

It seems like the average attention span is 60 seconds. You really think laws that are passed are done so with any thought about how th....Jesus did you guys see the yabos on NatBornKillers avatar????

Did you see my golden globe contributions? I've been helping

Originally Posted by jdandns

Well, if they were so forward thinking, why didn't the Founders come up with "Star Wars"?

But seriously, Sibes, you're a deeper thinker than I gave you credit for being.

Unblocked.

Imagine if we could all tap into our subconscious 100% of the time?

[free2131]

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

Does that apply to free press as well?
Back then it was newspapers, pamphlets and letters? Now information travels too fast to even verify.

What about the freedom of religion? I mean they were all Christians and really what they wanted was freedom to practice their Christian religion outside of government oversight. So does it not apply to other religions?

The second amendment is not about the types of arms, it’s about the right to own them without government infringement.

Just so we're clear, using you're logic, you're perfectly fine with my uncle who has a 5th grade education owning weapon's grade plutonium and mustard gas? Because if the answer is yes, then there is absolutely no reason for us to have any kind of dialogue because our thinking is just way too far apart.

Sent from my moto e5 (XT1920DL) using Tapatalk

[free2131]

Originally Posted by Siberian13

I've always seen this response. It's assumed these men weren't bright or couldn't think ahead. Throughout their lives and their knowledge of past history they've seen weapons become more powerful and change. I have seen the same and always think of what is the next crazy weapon humans will produce. If something was written today, would we not consider the future either?

I don't assume that at all. I do assume that there is technology so advanced that our brightest minds today couldn't fathom mankind having in the future. Making an absolute law regarding that technology without taking that into consideration is pretty foolhardy, IMO.

Sent from my moto e5 (XT1920DL) using Tapatalk

[Astros19]

The mental gymnastics in this thread are astounding.
Take off the comedian caps for a while and concentrate on understanding one another rather than trying your damndest to mock one another.
Kudos to those of you who are trying.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[jdandns]

Topps is having some fun with their on-demand Garbage Pail Kids sticker cards. These are from the current set, #2 in an overall series called "disg-Race To The White House".

[Ty Hope]

According to a new Tim Pool video, there is data proving that the further left a person goes on the political spectrum, the higher the % of recorded mental illness. Makes sense, no surprise there.

[free2131]

Originally Posted by Ty Hope

According to a new Tim Pool video, there is data proving that the further left a person goes on the political spectrum, the higher the % of recorded mental illness. Makes sense, no surprise there.

Might be because people on the left are more likely to take mental health as serious as it should be taken and seek treatment unlike the right who've historically viewed mental health issues as weaknesses.

Sent from my moto e5 (XT1920DL) using Tapatalk

[Ty Hope]

Originally Posted by free2131

Might be because people on the left are more likely to take mental health as serious as it should be taken and seek treatment unlike the right who've historically viewed mental health issues as weaknesses.

Sent from my moto e5 (XT1920DL) using Tapatalk

Possibly. But the number is astoundingly higher when you reach the fringe left. Something like 42%.

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by free2131

You mean France and Spain will be helping Jim Bob's militia? Hell yeah!!

In all seriousness, what's the limit? Because we both believe in a limit, but it's just at different points. Unless, of course, you believe Jim Bob's militia should be fine stocking chemical weapons and nuclear warheads.

The 2A was written when all we had were muskets and canons. Had the framers known what kinds of wonderful weapons of war man could create, I think they would have been a bit more clear as to what kind of arms we could bear.

The courts have ruled time and time again that the term "arms" in the 2nd Amendment refers to firearms. That would preclude you from having a right to own chemical weapons or nuclear warheads.

[preakness]

Originally Posted by Astros19

The mental gymnastics in this thread are astounding.
Take off the comedian caps for a while and concentrate on understanding one another rather than trying your damndest to mock one another.
Kudos to those of you who are trying.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Astros or US taxpayers filing out tax forms for IRS -- bigger cheaters?

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by preakness

Astros or US taxpayers filing out tax forms for IRS -- bigger cheaters?

What if the Astros players are also cheating on their taxes?

[JeremyNick]

Originally Posted by free2131

Just so we're clear, using you're logic, you're perfectly fine with my uncle who has a 5th grade education owning weapon's grade plutonium and mustard gas? Because if the answer is yes, then there is absolutely no reason for us to have any kind of dialogue because our thinking is just way too far apart.

Sent from my moto e5 (XT1920DL) using Tapatalk

Don’t be that guy....
Plutonium and mustard gas aren’t firearms.

If you want to have an actual discussion feel free. If you want to do what you just did, maybe you should just have discussions with that uncle of yours.

[jlzinck]

Originally Posted by LoveRookies

What got Jacquo a temp suspension?

Edit: Banned?

Guess I don't have to take him off my ignore list now.

[Brobocop]

Originally Posted by jlzinck

Guess I don't have to take him off my ignore list now.

I just looked through their post history and their last 100 posts were all in the politics thread over the past couple of days. Some people are way too passionate over politics.

[rcmb3220]

It's hard to believe that the Constitution was written to allows presidential pardons. That's a carryover from the days of a monarchy. Pardons are either ceremonious (Jack Johnson), used for your political cronies or pets (Mark Rich, Cisneros, Manning) or just bizarre (Patty Hearst).

There are no limits. This should be our next amendment.

[Soxfanguy]

Originally Posted by rcmb3220

It's hard to believe that the Constitution was written to allows presidential pardons. That's a carryover from the days of a monarchy. Pardons are either ceremonious (Jack Johnson), used for your political cronies or pets (Mark Rich, Cisneros, Manning) or just bizarre (Patty Hearst).



There are no limits. This should be our next amendment.

You talking about current presidents or something like Nixon getting pardoned?

[Soxfanguy]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...mp/4747228002/

A Gallup poll has encouraging news for President Donald Trump as his battle for reelection heats up: Six in 10 Americans say they are better off than they were three years ago when he took office, and about the same number credit him for the improvement.

[Soxfanguy]

His campaign has to be happy about that

[rcmb3220]

Originally Posted by Soxfanguy

You talking about current presidents or something like Nixon getting pardoned?

I'm talking about the president having the power to pardon. It should have never been given in the first place, and it should be taken away ASAP.

Nixon being pardoned sort of made sense. But look at the list past pardons. They are almost all crony, ceremonial or pet cause pardons.