Why not Tulsi Gabbard

#126
#126
I40flyer said:
I guess you don't understand how a Primary works, btw, Lincoln would not make to the dem stage either, no republican would.
Click to expand...
Trump wasnt a republican until he ran for office.

Just shows how much of a joke the system is.
 
#127
#127
LouderVol said:
Trump wasnt a republican until he ran for office.

Just shows how much of a joke the system is.
Click to expand...

Trump registered as a Republican in Manhattan in 1987 and since that time has changed his party affiliation five times. In 1999, Trump changed his party affiliation to the Independence Party of New York. In August 2001, Trump changed his party affiliation to Democratic. In September 2009, Trump changed his party affiliation back to the Republican Party. In December 2011, Trump changed to "no party affiliation" (independent). In April 2012, Trump again returned to the Republican Party.[3]
In a 2004 interview, Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer: "In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat," explaining: "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans. Now, it shouldn't be that way. But if you go back, I mean it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats...But certainly we had some very good economies under Democrats, as well as Republicans. But we've had some pretty bad disaster under the Republicans."[4] In a July 2015 interview, Trump said that he has a broad range of political positions and that "I identify with some things as a Democrat."[3]
During his 2016 campaign for the presidency, Trump consistently described the state of the United States in bleak terms, referring to it as a nation in dire peril that is plagued by lawlessness, poverty, and violence, constantly under threat, and at risk of having "nothing, absolutely nothing, left."[5][6] In accepting the Republican nomination for president, Trump said that "I alone can fix" the system,[7] and pledged that if elected, "Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo."[6] He described himself as a "law and order" candidate and "the voice" of "the forgotten men and women."[8] Trump's inaugural address on January 20, 2017 focused on his campaign theme of America in crisis and decline.[9] He pledged to end what he referred to as "American carnage,"[10][11] depicting the United States in a dystopian light—as a "land of abandoned factories, economic angst, rising crime"—while pledging "a new era in American politics."[9]
Although Trump was the Republican nominee, he has signaled that the official party platform, adopted at the 2016 Republican National Convention, diverges from his own views.[12] According to a Washington Post tally, Trump made some 282 campaign promises over the course of his 2016 campaign.[13]
In February 2017, Trump stated that he was a "total nationalist" in a "true sense".[14] In October 2018, Trump again described himself as a nationalist.[From Wiki]
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL69
#128
#128
rocytop2624 said:
Well bump stocks are extreme and it was after the Vegas shooting.
Click to expand...

I'm all for the 2A. But, I don't have an issue with the bump stock ban. It's an accessory, not a firearm. Not having a bump stock will not impede your basic 2A right imo. And as long as an AR style rifle is not modified to full auto, they are not an issue imo. I tend to agree a citizen has no need for a full auto machine gun. But, most are not going to use any set up of rifle or pistol illegally, so I can understand those that argue for all. I've seen some semi-auto pistols get emptied pretty darn fast in a skilled shooters hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#130
#130
Orangeslice13 said:
I asked that and that’s an area I have to look at but “Greg” says she understands the 2a but also understands the need for common sense gun laws. The difference between her and others proposing gun laws is she’s held a gun and actually knows about them.

Research coming
Click to expand...
She doesn't understand the common sense part of it.
 
#132
#132
GVF said:
I'm all for the 2A. But, I don't have an issue with the bump stock ban. It's an accessory, not a firearm. Not having a bump stock will not impede your basic 2A right imo. And as long as an AR style rifle is not modified to full auto, they are not an issue imo. I tend to agree a citizen has no need for a full auto machine gun. But, most are not going to use any set up of rifle or pistol illegally, so I can understand those that argue for all. I've seen some semi-auto pistols get emptied pretty darn fast in a skilled shooters hands.
Click to expand...
Many would also say a large mag is an accessory also. Limiting that will not impede your basic 2a rights either. How about a scope, muzzle brake, lazer sight, collapsible stock, etc?
 
  • Like
Reactions: I40flyer and Orangeslice13
#133
#133
If you believe that there is any ground to give on 2A, take a good look at what they have done to the 1A over this media induced virus scare. The lawsuits coming when this scare is over will be absolutely astronomical. The reason that I say it's a hoax is they haven't closed grocery stores. Krogers had a density of about 2 people per square yard today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL69
#134
#134
utvolpj said:
Many would also say a large mag is an accessory also. Limiting that will not impede your basic 2a rights either. How about a scope, muzzle brake, lazer, collapsible stock, etc?
Click to expand...
Or a semi-auto, or a bolt action or a single shoot or a black powder rifle or a bb gun. We should just be good with bows now because they are considered a firearm. You are the poster child for not understanding the common sense portion of the left argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL69
#135
#135
82_VOL_83 said:
Or a semi-auto, or a bolt action or a single shoot or a black powder rifle or a bb gun. We should just be good with bows now because they are considered a firearm. You are the poster child for not understanding the common sense portion of the left argument.
Click to expand...
Uh yeah, you've jumped too quickly and completely misunderstood my post. He made the claim that it was ok since he didn't want that particular accessory. I simply took his argument one step further to show how the slope works.
 
#136
#136
GVF said:
I'm all for the 2A. But, I don't have an issue with the bump stock ban. It's an accessory, not a firearm. Not having a bump stock will not impede your basic 2A right imo. And as long as an AR style rifle is not modified to full auto, they are not an issue imo. I tend to agree a citizen has no need for a full auto machine gun. But, most are not going to use any set up of rifle or pistol illegally, so I can understand those that argue for all. I've seen some semi-auto pistols get emptied pretty darn fast in a skilled shooters hands.
Click to expand...

I agree the bump stock ban isn't necessarily a 2A issue, it's worse since it violates every right to property known to man. How this ban hasn't been struck down by a court yet is baffling.
 
#137
#137
GVF said:
I'm all for the 2A. But, I don't have an issue with the bump stock ban. It's an accessory, not a firearm. Not having a bump stock will not impede your basic 2A right imo. And as long as an AR style rifle is not modified to full auto, they are not an issue imo. I tend to agree a citizen has no need for a full auto machine gun. But, most are not going to use any set up of rifle or pistol illegally, so I can understand those that argue for all. I've seen some semi-auto pistols get emptied pretty darn fast in a skilled shooters hands.
Click to expand...
I don't want to be mistaken I have a Mac 9 from when you could buy it in a store and AR and shotguns and a Glock and a Beretta. I am all about the NRA and 2a. I for some reason see the bump stock as a sacrifice. But I don't like how it was done and it will give a President that wants to ban a Guide. Reagan ban fully autos and that sucks. People that want to kill will do it some way. And I want the 2a protected.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: I40flyer
#142
#142
Rasputin_Vol said:
And really, that is a point that we can pick at him on when it comes to the 2A, but personally, I didn't lose any sleep over the bump stock deal.
Click to expand...

You should. If a president can criminalize ownership of a piece of personal property w/o compensation or a grandfather clause they can criminalize anything. The bumpstock ban goes way beyond the 2A.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and hndog609
#144
#144
utvolpj said:
Many would also say a large mag is an accessory also. Limiting that will not impede your basic 2a rights either. How about a scope, muzzle brake, lazer sight, collapsible stock, etc?
Click to expand...

The "accessory" in question changes the actual functional characteristics of the firearm. Specifically it modifies the weapon in such a way as to make an otherwise legal firearm into an analogue for an NFA regulated one.
 
#145
#145
hndog609 said:
The "accessory" in question changes the actual functional characteristics of the firearm. Specifically it modifies the weapon in such a way as to make an otherwise legal firearm into an analogue for an NFA regulated one.
Click to expand...

Well the NFA is ******** so any end run around it should be celebrated.
 
#148
#148
Pepe_Silvia said:
But it's very relevant to this discussion. If trump were as ardent a supporter of the 2A as he claims to be, why would he go through with a bump stock ban?
Click to expand...

I wasn't addressing anything regarding Trump, merely commenting on the flaw in conflating things like scopes/muzzle brakes/etc with bump stocks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top