#RESIST
Leftist politicians always discuss the NRA in terms of a "gun lobby" instead of an organization made up of millions of American citizens.
To them - that is a lobby.Originally Posted by Robinson
Last edited by Suvorov; 10-05-2016 at 01:11 PM.
Severely anti gun people cannot imagine why any sane person can support gun rights. This is why they fall into the perception that the NRA and gun manufacturers are the gun lobby boogieman that holds the country hostage. I am fine with them having this misconception because it keeps them from understanding why they fail so frequently to pass what they think are common sense regulations.
What's relevant here is that many that support Clinton do own guns and think that guns limited to the home are OK. Clinton is flat out saying that Heller is wrong and she is against guns stored in the home.
#RESIST
Dude, everybody knows she's a grabber, it's just that some people don't think she'd be any more able to act on it than the current grabber-in-chief has. They're willing to play dice with SCOTUS appointments, which creeps me right the hell out though.
The decision to ignore Merrick Garland's nomination was a poor one in my opinion, and will turn into an epic disaster if HRC wins. Embrace regret.
Maybe, but while Garland is relatively moderate on other stuff, he is firmly anti-gun. Like some current justices, because of his background he simply cannot conceive that the founders really wanted to protect the right to own firearms and he "knows" to the core of his being that "assault weapons" are uniquely dangerous and simply should not be allowed.
No rational argument can convince him otherwise because his entire life experience tells him that guns are bad and that good people don't own guns.
I think Hillary will re-nominate Garland (he progressive base would look at that as an in-your-face move, which they love) so the whole thing might be moot, but on the issue of guns I doubt the extreme radicals she might otherwise nominate (if she has a veto-free Senate majority) are unlikely to be any more hostile to guns than Garland.
Last edited by Jeep; 10-05-2016 at 03:31 PM.
Agreed, and the most dishonest statement from the grabbers is "nobody wants to take your guns." What they mean is "... right now." They realize door to door confiscation is not realistic but have instead taken a longer, generational approach to eventually eliminating civilian gun ownership.
The end won't come by blue helmeted soldiers banging down your door, it will come through a thousand bureaucratic paper cuts over time.
A-yup.
Tangentially, perhaps the only upside to Bloomberg and his massive, green-with-inlaid-security-fibers astroturfing is we now have some exemplars to point at whenever the "common sense" crowd opines that Australia-style bans and confiscation can't happen here.
Reply With Quote