82_VOL_83
Nickelback rocks!
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2012
- Messages
- 52,898
- Likes
- 45,632
Nothing I posted is wrong. You can't make the same claim. Here's your postpj wrong about gun control? Tell me it ain't so.
I'm pretty sure that Obama would have done something about bump stocks if he knew that they existed and what they were.
Neither can you.Nothing I posted is wrong. You can't make the same claim
Yes, he knew exactly what bump stock were and what BATFE was doing on the administrative level and yet he had to read of significant events from the MSM to find out about major incidents during his Administration.Nothing I posted is wrong. You can't make the same claim. Here's your post
Obviously he knew that they existed and what they were yet did nothing.
Why would I care what the NRA did? I posted that earlier anyways so I'm aware of their stance. They're lobbyistsNeither can you.
Your interpretation of events regarding gun control and how both Obama and Trump perceive it are wrong. You just convienently twist/manipulate "facts" to fit your argument in a most disengenious way. But that's what you do, now, ain't it?
The NRA didn't even stand up for bump stocks.
NRA | Joint Statement
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
They are champions of the 2nd Amendment and yet you can't make the connection because you are so caught up in the way you want things to be and can't understand why they aren't?Why would I care what the NRA did? I posted that earlier anyways so I'm aware of their stance. They're lobbyists
For individual firearms ownership. Limits within existing statutes that are stare decisis and have been in place since 1934.Champions who are in favor of limiting it? Interesting stance
They're lobbyists
The NRA is pushing for more limits and will likely submit again when Trump implements more. They do not serve my interests as a gun ownerFor individual firearms ownership. Limits within existing statutes that are stare decisis and have been in place since 1934.
National Firearms Act | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
I know you know this but you are a stubborn little mod.
Of course a HUGE difference is that no one forced any of these people to put themselves in this situation. That's the rub. You want to just open the floodgates and let them in. Problem kicked down the road. Rational and reasonable people want it stopped before THEIR problem becomes OUR problem. I am sure they are free to go back to their country of origin if they wish.I'm not about to say she's right, because it just a really terrible comparison. If she'd said internment camp, or even POW camp, I doubt anyone would have given much grief.
Part of me thinks she knew better, but went with it for effect. Maybe she is just that dumb though.
You know this how? Where's your "facts/proof?"They'll agree when Trump goes after suppressors
Nothing would change her mind, nothing.NBC's Chuck Todd slammed by liberal stars, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for knocking her 'concentration camps' remarks
The left are starting to eat their own. Left condems Chuck. The right defends Chuck. What a world.
Maybe AOC needs to go to the border & live there for a week and actually see what's going on.
I bet we have soldiers out in theaters that would be happy to have the comforts that migrants are getting.