Nate Silver shows how leftists think like communists, not like human beings

[UltraChad]

You keep trying to catch me in some sort of predicament. I've already given my position.

Take it or leave it.

Ain't no trying on this one.

You backed yourself into a corner and now you're cowering out like the pussy I said you were.

 

[dmallord]

On many occasions I've put forward what some remedies could be, just tired of repeating myself. One remedy is strictly enforcing gun laws that are already on the books. One recent step towards cleaning up gun violence is holding Parents liable for prosecution if their children are involved in gun violence. Need to patrol the internet when dealing with under age access.

BTW I never mentioned Stalin.

Enforcing existing gun laws is certainly a valid point that requires better control through law enforcement methods. Laws, as they currently exist, vary and are not uniform across states. This variation poses a serious issue and is often cited as a flaw in tracking who should or should not be able to purchase firearms. This topic could serve as a long-running discussion.

The recent Michigan case against parents who knowingly purchased a weapon for a child with emotional issues was a step toward holding parents accountable for such firearm purchases. Both are serving prison time along with the child for the deaths he caused. Other states, slow to respond, are enacting legislation to address the concern you raised.

Stalin was mentioned in the article you noted. I reread it. You didn't place it in quotes, which initially made it appear as if you authored the content rather than citing the other writer. However, since it is your referenced source, I presume you align with its content and sentiments. Otherwise, why would you cite it?

Other regulations, such as those regarding ghost guns, also need to be addressed. These types of weapons are generally considered unnecessary for self-defense and should fall outside the scope of 'the right to bear arms.'

Those who advocate for AR-15 style weapons are the concerning ones, in my view. I'm okay with weapons meant for hunting and self-defense. I just don't see the need for possessing an AR-15, particularly with high-capacity magazines. How many times can you hit a family of squirrels and still make squirrel stew with what remains?

 

[ll74]

Ain't no trying on this one.

You backed yourself into a corner and now you're cowering out like the pussy I said you were.

Nope. There are plenty of ways to prevent crazy fuckers from getting weapons. I've posted about them individually in the forum before. But just like the abortion debate, it's useless to spend time on it. Look those posts up if you need.

I support keeping guns from crazy fucks, you don't. No debate needed

 

[icanhelp1]

Enforcing existing gun laws is certainly a valid point that requires better control through law enforcement methods. Laws, as they currently exist, vary and are not uniform across states. This variation poses a serious issue and is often cited as a flaw in tracking who should or should not be able to purchase firearms. This topic could serve as a long-running discussion.

The recent Michigan case against parents who knowingly purchased a weapon for a child with emotional issues was a step toward holding parents accountable for such firearm purchases. Both are serving prison time along with the child for the deaths he caused. Other states, slow to respond, are enacting legislation to address the concern you raised.

Stalin was mentioned in the article you noted. I reread it. You didn't place it in quotes, which initially made it appear as if you authored the content rather than citing the other writer. However, since it is your referenced source, I presume you align with its content and sentiments. Otherwise, why would you cite it?

Other regulations, such as those regarding ghost guns, also need to be addressed. These types of weapons are generally considered unnecessary for self-defense and should fall outside the scope of 'the right to bear arms.'

Those who advocate for AR-15 style weapons are the concerning ones, in my view. I'm okay with weapons meant for hunting and self-defense. I just don't see the need for possessing an AR-15, particularly with high-capacity magazines. How many times can you hit a family of squirrels and still make squirrel stew with what remains?

Blue sky states shouldn't have the same gun restrictions as other states, however that being said, I do believe there should be a licensing mandate in all states for ownership and use of firearms.

 

[dmallord]

Blue sky states shouldn't have the same gun restrictions as other states, however that being said, I do believe there should be a licensing mandate in all states for ownership and use of firearms.

Are you talking about securities, or is this another blue-state definition term used? I don't know what blue states are here.

I agree with a licensing mandate and a need for a national registry database for law enforcement efficiency in tracking weapons.

Another point of regulation is the 'straw purchase buyer.' That seems to be a funneling conduit to weapons for the cartels down south.

 

[Rightguide]

Communist politics do not, of course, have anything to do with an open-borders immigration policy. Communist countries have always had really tight border control.

Communists what to destroy America. Invasion is the plan.

 

[Politruk]

That's to keep people IN not so much for keeping them out.

Yeah, but it works both ways. Just try sneaking into North Korea.

 

[Politruk]

Communists what to destroy America. Invasion is the plan.

No invasion that destroys -- or even threatens -- America will ever come from Mexico.

 

[Politruk]

....and they are communist.

 

[UltraChad]

Nope.

Yup/

There are plenty of ways to prevent crazy fuckers from getting weapons.

Sure...but you won't name a SINGLE FUCKIN ONE. And everyone with a clue knows why.

I support keeping guns from crazy fucks, you don't. No debate needed

Yea, gun grabbing Democrat.

 

[ll74]

Yup/

Nope

Sure...but you won't name a SINGLE FUCKIN ONE. And everyone with a clue knows why.

I don't need to

Yea, gun grabbing Democrat.

How many guns have been taken from you?

 

[UltraChad]

I don't need to

You don't want to because it will expose you as the basic gun grabbing Democrat that you are.

How many guns have been taken from you?

What's that got to do with anything??

We're talking about what your and democrats ideal policies are, not what is.

 

[ll74]

You don't want to because it will expose you as the basic gun grabbing Democrat that you are.

Obviously....grabbed all of your guns

What's that got to do with anything??

We're talking about what your and democrats ideal policies are, not what is.

You can talk about it. I already gave my position.

 

[UltraChad]

Obviously....grabbed all of your guns

Bet you wish you could.

You can talk about it. I already gave my position.

Vague bullshit as ever. God forbid you actually give anything specific.

 

[ll74]

Bet you wish you could.

If you are a crazy fuck, then I'd let authorities take them

Vague bullshit as ever. God forbid you actually give anything specific.

Don't care.

 

[UltraChad]

If you are a crazy fuck,

A totally nebulous bullshit standard....vague as your fee fees.

then I'd let authorities take them

Yea like I said you're a gun grabby progressive Dem.

Don't care.

It's hardly a position of any sort, why would you??

Just more vague " not a democrat" cope that democrats tell themselves so they manage their cognitive dissonance. Chug more comrade.

 

[ll74]

A totally nebulous bullshit standard....vague as your fee fees.

Cool

Yea like I said you're a gun grabby progressive Dem.

If you're crazy, you don't deserve a gun

It's hardly a position of any sort, why would you??

Just more vague " not a democrat" cope that democrats tell themselves so they manage their cognitive dissonance. Chug more comrade.

It's a position.
You are an absolutist. I'm not

 

[icanhelp1]

Are you talking about securities, or is this another blue-state definition term used? I don't know what blue states are here.

I agree with a licensing mandate and a need for a national registry database for law enforcement efficiency in tracking weapons.

Another point of regulation is the 'straw purchase buyer.' That seems to be a funneling conduit to weapons for the cartels down south.

Perhaps Big Sky states is more appropriate, where houses and neighbors are miles apart.

 

[Lazaran]

Are you talking about securities, or is this another blue-state definition term used? I don't know what blue states are here.

I agree with a licensing mandate and a need for a national registry database for law enforcement efficiency in tracking weapons.

Another point of regulation is the 'straw purchase buyer.' That seems to be a funneling conduit to weapons for the cartels down south.

“60 Minutes” just had a great segment on this. It involved straw purchases of guns in America arming / propping up the Mexican drug cartels:

Guns sales & manufacturing need to be treated like opioid sales & manufacturing, and sellers & manufacturers need to be held legally and financially liable for bad behavior; full stop.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

“60 Minutes” just had a great segment on this. It involved straw purchases of guns in America arming / propping up the Mexican drug cartels:

Guns sales & manufacturing need to be treated like opioid sales & manufacturing, and sellers & manufacturers need to be held legally and financially liable for bad behavior; full stop.

Agreed! We can start with this guy and his henchman.

 

[Lazaran]

Agreed! We can start with this guy and his henchman.

Nah. More like: “Agreed! We can start with this guy and his henchmen”:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-administration-used-fast-and-furious-tactics







Side note:

Eric Holder was contemptuous of republicans in congress because they wanted him to throw frontline agents under the bus for losing track of the guns and also put their lives at risk by providing sensitive documents that revealed human assets and covert tactics.

Also:

The G. W. Bush administration initiated the program under the name “Operation Wide Receiver”, and it was continued during the Obama administration under the name “Operation Fast and Furious”. Ironically, the intentions of the “Gun Walking” operations were noble, and President Obama’s administration DID indict multiple individuals involved in straw purchases.

Also:

The reason the “Gun Walking” operations were initiated in the first place is because there was ALREADY a U.S. to Mexico gun trafficking problem - and there still is.

Hope that ^ helps.

 

[Politruk]

The reason the “Gun Walking” operations were initiated in the first place is because there was ALREADY a U.S. to Mexico gun trafficking problem - and there still is.

Well, we all knew that!

 

[UltraChad]

Communist are heretics....
https://media2.giphy.com/media/VT81lAAamPTxHK3w0H/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b952sbt9myvr682if9qcb64g07fjl4ej7iemrk8e7zho&ep=v1_internal_gif_by_id&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g