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

[Siberian13]

Originally Posted by marl1220

In all seriousness, I don't see how it could be fun.

Fun as in laughing at them for actually thinking it will work.

[marl1220]

Originally Posted by marl1220

In all seriousness, I don't see how it could be fun.

Originally Posted by Siberian13

Fun as in laughing at them for actually thinking it will work.

Ah, got it.

[NeedChapmans]

New Biden allegation. Off we go!

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile...g-her-breasts/

[Joan p]

Originally Posted by discostu

Of course it should be larger, just like fewer Americans should be living paycheck to paycheck. But there are real financial concerns that don't involve the market or 401ks.

But it would never negate my premise...the majority of Americans have little to no influence and/or impact regarding the stock market.

The stock market will always be stacked against those that can't weather a storm. Always.

The stock market would rather outsource a job or issue layoffs to increase share value, rather than maintain those that can't weather the storm.

We are in a bubble here, the entire forum is based around a hobby with tremendous expendable income. However, even in this market we get to see how market influences prey on the lower level collectors.

Great post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by Soxfanguy

This is what Democratic governors don’t understand

We have a Republican Governor in a Democratic state and he doesn't understand anything either.

[wood minis]

Originally Posted by Joan p

Great post


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

agreed.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by marl1220

Yes, the constitution provides citizens the right to bear arms. Without turning this in to a whole "it's my constitutional right" thing , I'm looking for a reason why someone would need a semiautomatic/automatic weapon. Yes, it's your right. I get it, really. What is the purpose of it though? I'm not trying to start a fight. I have relatives who hunt regularly with hunting rifles. They seem to get the job done. However, I do have a cousin who owns a room of guns that would make an armory jealous. He doesn't hunt. I asked him about it and he just shrugs his shoulder and laughs. I don't get it.

The Constitution does not give us the rights, It limits the government from taking them away. Big distinction.

[techtre2003]

Originally Posted by marl1220

Yes, the constitution provides citizens the right to bear arms. Without turning this in to a whole "it's my constitutional right" thing , I'm looking for a reason why someone would need a semiautomatic/automatic weapon. Yes, it's your right. I get it, really. What is the purpose of it though? I'm not trying to start a fight. I have relatives who hunt regularly with hunting rifles. They seem to get the job done. However, I do have a cousin who owns a room of guns that would make an armory jealous. He doesn't hunt. I asked him about it and he just shrugs his shoulder and laughs. I don't get it.

Because semi-autos are much more efficient to use. It goes back to need vs. want. Nobody NEEDS a semi-automatic rifle (although most are either semi-automatic or lever action with a magazine). Why does anyone need a car that goes 120+ mph. Why does anyone need satellite TV with 500 channels? Why does anyone need a cellphone? Why does anyone need pieces of cardboard with pictures of guys with uniforms on?



My question would be why are you wanting to take away my AR-15 because a few nutjobs were being nutjobs? And why "assault rifles" when handgun fatalities are much more common?

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by Joan p

We have vast amounts of money . How we chose to spend it is the issue. Practically every other country has figured out how to make socialized medicine work why can’t we ? Either a cap on what can be charged for rent or a realistic minimum wage is desperately needed . Safe , basic ,clean housing , healthcare and food are human rights and have no place being for profit businesses until the fundamental needs of everyone is met


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice to see you continue to push your BS socialist ways.

Please show one document that exists on earth that laws come from (Bible, Magna Carta, Constitution, etc.) that will back up your argument that housing, healthcare, and food are human rights. I guess the Founding Fathers were too stupid to think of those back when they were drafting the Constitution and creating this great Nation. I'm so glad we have such a smart person like you around.

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by Joan p

I support the constitution and your unalienable right to own a musket


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe you should read the Constitution one day so you can see that nowhere in there doers it say musket.

[fulltritty]

Originally Posted by Joan p

Serious question: Where do you draw the line on what is acceptable for a private citizen to own? Unless you believe people have a right to own a nuclear warhead there has to be a line somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We already had this discussion pages back but we all know you are just a troll. The Supreme Court has settled into case law what "arms" in the Second Amendment means and it doesn't mean a nuclear warhead.

Bu, please, keep being annoying, uninformed you.

[marl1220]

Originally Posted by techtre2003

Because semi-autos are much more efficient to use. It goes back to need vs. want. Nobody NEEDS a semi-automatic rifle (although most are either semi-automatic or lever action with a magazine). Why does anyone need a car that goes 120+ mph. Why does anyone need satellite TV with 500 channels? Why does anyone need a cellphone? Why does anyone need pieces of cardboard with pictures of guys with uniforms on?



My question would be why are you wanting to take away my AR-15 because a few nutjobs were being nutjobs? And why "assault rifles" when handgun fatalities are much more common?

First off, I never said I wanted to take away your guns. I asked the purpose of owning a semiautomatic/automatic weapon. And I agree with the car analogy. Why make a car that can go that fast when it's not legal to go that fast? I'm sure I'll get plenty of blow back on that as well. But the other comparisons don't hold water. Last time I knew it wasn't possible to kill a room of people with a cell phone, TV, or sports cards.

[RedSoxFan28]

Originally Posted by marl1220

First off, I never said I wanted to take away your guns. I asked the purpose of owning a semiautomatic/automatic weapon. And I agree with the car analogy. Why make a car that can go that fast when it's not legal to go that fast? I'm sure I'll get plenty of blow back on that as well. But the other comparisons don't hold water. Last time I knew it wasn't possible to kill a room of people with a cell phone, TV, or sports cards.

Because the 2nd amendment, because I can, and because murica. Cant name a practical use. They'll probably then say, for self defense/ against the government, like they'd stand a chance vs them.

[pac213up]

Originally Posted by majestik101

The new WH press secretary is a smoke show

“I will never lie to you. You have my word on that.”

[Joan p]

Originally Posted by fulltritty

We already had this discussion pages back but we all know you are just a troll. The Supreme Court has settled into case law what "arms" in the Second Amendment means and it doesn't mean a nuclear warhead.

Bu, please, keep being annoying, uninformed you.

My bad , I shouldn’t have expected a mature response


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rman112]

Originally Posted by NeedChapmans

New Biden allegation. Off we go!

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile...g-her-breasts/

"I think the most important takeaway out of all this ought to be this one, singular, very important fact; Trump is bad."

- The Media

[JeremyNick]

Originally Posted by marl1220

Yes, the constitution provides citizens the right to bear arms. Without turning this in to a whole "it's my constitutional right" thing , I'm looking for a reason why someone would need a semiautomatic/automatic weapon. Yes, it's your right. I get it, really. What is the purpose of it though? I'm not trying to start a fight. I have relatives who hunt regularly with hunting rifles. They seem to get the job done. However, I do have a cousin who owns a room of guns that would make an armory jealous. He doesn't hunt. I asked him about it and he just shrugs his shoulder and laughs. I don't get it.

I think you’re asking a good question.

From a constitutional perspective, “need” is not considered necessary as a justification. So the “it’s my right” answer is really all that is necessary.

So I think you are asking purely why. For that the answer is personal. I actually own no “assault style”, or whatever that means, weapons. I prefer older guns with wood and steel. The why is preference. I hunt with mine, carry for protection and enjoy shooting sports. I have to pay money every time I purchase for background checks, keep my license to carry up to date, etc. There are already plenty of regulations on my right to keep and bear arms, that any more becomes an infringement.

There is as much “purpose and need” for having a variety of guns as there is owning 46 different variations of a players Prizm card.

[cnewby]

Originally Posted by Joan p

My bad , I shouldn’t have expected a mature response


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He crushed you....again . and this is your response ? It doesn ' t even make sense .

[chezball]

Originally Posted by fulltritty

Coming from someone who constantly posts extreme left-wing moronic ideas and responses, I'll take that as a compliment because we all know who the less intelligent person is around here.

It shames me to think you are a fellow veteran because you are as Anti-American as the POS "squad" members you so adore!

Not mention the green new deal that not one person voted for.

[JeremyNick]

Originally Posted by Joan p

Serious question: Where do you draw the line on what is acceptable for a private citizen to own? Unless you believe people have a right to own a nuclear warhead there has to be a line somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That line has already been drawn and it has been discussed here before.

The issue is you, without a shred of knowledge, continually keep wanting to redraw a new line.

[cnewby]

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

That line has already been drawn and it has been discussed here before.

The issue is you, without a shred of knowledge, continually keep wanting to redraw a new line.

Joy makes the lines . Get with the program .

[NeedChapmans]

Originally Posted by rman112

"I think the most important takeaway out of all this ought to be this one, singular, very important fact; Trump is bad."

- The Media

Tara Reade, Lucy Flores, Amy Lappos, Vail Kohnert-Yount, Caitlyn Caruso, D.J. Hill, Sofie Karasek, Ally Coll, Eva Murry

The list is getting longer. Moral high-ground is getting lower by the day.

[MIRRABB]

Originally Posted by pac213up

“I will never lie to you. You have my word on that.”

"This President will always put America first," she said. "He will always protect American citizens. We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here. We will not see terrorism come here. And isn't that refreshing when contrasting it with the awful presidency of President Obama?"

She's something special, will fit right in at the clown show.

[Joan p]

Originally Posted by cnewby

He crushed you....again . and this is your response ? It doesn ' t even make sense .

He crushed me again? Are you actually keeping score?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joan p]

Originally Posted by chezball

Not mention the green new deal that not one person voted for.

QAnon says you have zero credibility


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk