Biden Position on Guns Is a Joke

You have a “degree“ in physics. You should know then that AGW is directly related to evolution……right ?

AGW has nothing to do with evolution.
Evolution is slow and takes millions of years, while AGW is making huge climate changes in less than 100 years.
 
Was the military aid to Ukraine being held up at the time of the orange call?

Yes or no?
Since Obama sent no military aid to the Ukraine ever, that seems a pointless question.

The White House said that Trumps military aid to the Ukraine was held up, but over the DNC hack investigation, NOT over the Burisma Holdings investigation.

{...
Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that President Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine until it looked into the debunked conspiracy theory that Ukrainian nationals were in possession of a computer server belonging to the Democratic National Committee.

Asked why the administration had withheld $400 million in military aid allocated by Congress to help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression, Mulvaney first cited the president’s desire to make sure Kiev’s government was not corrupt. Then, confirming a quid pro quo laid out in the partial summary released by the White House of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mulvaney cited a conspiracy theory involving the DNC server that housed emails leaked during the 2016 campaign.

Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and some in the administration have been looking for evidence that the DNC hack was carried out by Ukrainian agents seeking to help the Clinton campaign, rather than Russians trying to help Trump — which was the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies.

“Did he also mention to me in the past the corruption related to the DNC server?” Mulvaney responded when asked about the president’s public call for China to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden. “Absolutely. No question about that. But that’s it. That’s why we held up the money.”
...}
 
Since Obama sent no military aid to the Ukraine ever, that seems a pointless question.

The White House said that Trumps military aid to the Ukraine was held up, but over the DNC hack investigation, NOT over the Burisma Holdings investigation.

{...
Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that President Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine until it looked into the debunked conspiracy theory that Ukrainian nationals were in possession of a computer server belonging to the Democratic National Committee.

Asked why the administration had withheld $400 million in military aid allocated by Congress to help Ukraine defend itself from Russian aggression, Mulvaney first cited the president’s desire to make sure Kiev’s government was not corrupt. Then, confirming a quid pro quo laid out in the partial summary released by the White House of Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mulvaney cited a conspiracy theory involving the DNC server that housed emails leaked during the 2016 campaign.

Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and some in the administration have been looking for evidence that the DNC hack was carried out by Ukrainian agents seeking to help the Clinton campaign, rather than Russians trying to help Trump — which was the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies.

“Did he also mention to me in the past the corruption related to the DNC server?” Mulvaney responded when asked about the president’s public call for China to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden. “Absolutely. No question about that. But that’s it. That’s why we held up the money.”
...}
President Obama's aid to the country is not germane to the question asked.
 
President Obama's aid to the country is not germane to the question asked.

It is germane because Biden illegally withheld the cash Obama was sending, in order to force the firing of Shokin.
It was Biden who illegally used US foreign aid in a quid pro quo, to stop any investigation of Burisma Holdings.
 
It is germane because Biden illegally withheld the cash Obama was sending, in order to force the firing of Shokin.
It was Biden who illegally used US foreign aid in a quid pro quo, to stop any investigation of Burisma Holdings.
Your understanding of that is wingnut silo bullshit.

The Obama administration working with the EU and the IMF had tied the billion loan guarantee to Shokin being fired because he was an Russian asset in Ukraine. He had no active investigations of Burisma or Hunter Biden at the time of his firing. He was widely considered to be a compromised official, ya know the kind that the former 1-term president could only like.

Additionally, he currently resides in Russia.
 
Your understanding of that is wingnut silo bullshit.

The Obama administration working with the EU and the IMF had tied the billion loan guarantee to Shokin being fired because he was an Russian asset in Ukraine. He had no active investigations of Burisma or Hunter Biden at the time of his firing. He was widely considered to be a compromised official, ya know the kind that the former 1-term president could only like.

Additionally, he currently resides in Russia.

The EU and IMF is just about as corrupt as the US is.
It is totally and completely immoral to tie a loan guarantee to the firing of the Attorney General.
It is illegal for foreign pressure to be able to cause that to happen.
Whether or not Shokin was a Russian asset is irrelevant, since the Ukraine use to be part of the Soviet Union, and had signed treaties to remain a Russian ally.
It makes absolutely NO difference at all if Shokin had started an investigation of Burisma Holdings or not.
All that matters is that Biden did not want one to start, and that he illegally used US foreign aid in order to extort Shokin's illegal termination.
 
The EU and IMF is just about as corrupt as the US is.
It is totally and completely immoral to tie a loan guarantee to the firing of the Attorney General.
It is illegal for foreign pressure to be able to cause that to happen.
Whether or not Shokin was a Russian asset is irrelevant, since the Ukraine use to be part of the Soviet Union, and had signed treaties to remain a Russian ally.
It makes absolutely NO difference at all if Shokin had started an investigation of Burisma Holdings or not.
All that matters is that Biden did not want one to start, and that he illegally used US foreign aid in order to extort Shokin's illegal termination.
Again, I'm not buying your Russian take on the issue. The Ukraine under Russian influence was a very corrupt country. Removing corruption is goal, not something to tolerate. The Obama administration with the EU and IMF had the correct policy.

And yeah, everything is corrupt right. Unless it validates my biases, right.

Don't let facts get in the way.

Fact check: Biden leveraged $1B in aid to Ukraine to oust corrupt prosecutor, not to help his son
 
Again, I'm not buying your Russian take on the issue. The Ukraine under Russian influence was a very corrupt country. Removing corruption is goal, not something to tolerate. The Obama administration with the EU and IMF had the correct policy.

And yeah, everything is corrupt right. Unless it validates my biases, right.

Don't let facts get in the way.

Fact check: Biden leveraged $1B in aid to Ukraine to oust corrupt prosecutor, not to help his son

I disagree.
The Ukraine under US influence became much MORE corrupt, not less.
Such as murdering 14k ethnic Russians, violating treaties, stealing Russian oil, trying to get NATO nukes, etc.
It is totally corrupt and illegal for a foreign and distant government to try to get the Attorney General fired.
It should not even be possible if not for the country being totally corrupt.

If you think the US, IMF, and EU are not corrupt, then why were they trying to take over the government of the Ukraine?
We have no legitimate strategic interest in the Ukraine, other than trying to illegally harm Russia.
 
AGW has nothing to do with evolution.
Evolution is slow and takes millions of years, while AGW is making huge climate changes in less than 100 years.
So much for your so called degree. The rate of change of the climate by accelerating has allowed species (like deer ticks and Lyme disease) to evolve faster then their natural enemies. It has nothing to do with the climate changing, it has to do with the climate changing faster then OUR species and others, can adapt. Any graph in world aver temps and emissions show how steep the rate of change is than any time then in the history of man kind.

Geesus, in physics you need calc. ….evolution isn’t slow. It’s rapid and oft unpredictable in the virus, bacterial and simple disease carrying world our species has to face. Geesus, so much for that physics degree……it was wasted if it ever existed. You should have taken a bio course to go with it.

Evolution is slow ? That’s the statement of a child.
wtf do you call selective breeding. It’s variable. It didn’t take millions of years to develope the dairy cow….


this why frauds need to be called out and not pampered.
 
Last edited:
So much for your so called degree. The rate of change of the climate by accelerating has allowed species (like deer ticks and Lyme disease) to evolve faster then their natural enemies. It has nothing to do with the climate changing, it has to do with the climate changing faster then OUR species and others, can adapt. Any graph in world aver temps and emissions show how steep the rate of change is than any time then in the history of man kind.

Geesus, in physics you need calc. ….evolution isn’t slow. It’s rapid and oft unpredictable in the virus, bacterial and simple disease carrying world our species has to face. Geesus, so much for that physics degree……it was wasted if it ever existed. You should have taken a bio course to go with it.

Evolution is slow ? That’s the statement of a child.
wtf do you call selective breeding. It’s variable. It didn’t take millions of years to develope the dairy cow….


this why frauds need to be called out and not pampered.

Wrong.
Selective breeding is NOT evolution.
For selective breeding to be possible, the traits you select for have to already exist.
Evolution requires mutations to create absolutely NEW traits.
That is very slow because almost all random changes like that are not viable, and can not propagate at all.
So you have to wait for random events to cause changes that actually are better instead of worse.
That can take a very long time.
Then the trait has to become more dominant some how.
And that is from the natural selection aspect of evolution.
That can happen very quickly.
Just a few generations even.
But evolution is not just natural selection, but accidental mutation first, and then natural selection.

By the way, when people talk about virus mutations, they likely are wrong.
While a virus does not reproduce sexually, it is possible for more than one virus to injects its RMA or DNA into the same cell nucleus. When that happens, new combinations are possible, similar to hybrids, even though not sexual.
So a new virus trait is possible very quickly, without any random mutation taking place.
 
Here's what Joe Biden has repeatedly said he want to do about guns in America.
1. Ban what he calls "assault weapons"
Assault weapons were all but banned 88 years ago.

Time to invoke the Twenty-fifth Amendment. Traitor Joe doesn't even know what century it is.


2. Ban high-capacity magazines.
3. Hold gun Manufacturers "accountable"
Traitor Joe will have to get used to being disappointed. Americans will not allow him to violate their civil liberties.
 
All three losers actually did nothing to limit the second amendment.
That is incorrect. Bill Clinton violated the Second Amendment.

Barack Obama tried hard to violate the Second Amendment. The NRA defeated him.

Traitor Joe whines because the NRA won't let him violate the Second Amendment.
 
True... and I agree... but I believe the judicial overturned that ban as unconstitutional.
Thanks for the link. With all that was going on in 2021 I missed that story.
That was a mid-level appeals decision in a case that is destined for higher courts no matter who wins the early cases.

The Supreme Court will be the ultimate decider, and they probably won't hear the case until next year.
 
Banning certain types of weapons does not infringe on the right to bear arms.
It does when we have the right to have those types of weapons.


There is no need for high-capacity magazines.
That's the thing about rights. When you have the right to have something, you aren't required to need it.


A 20-round magazine is more than enough.
The police don't seem to think so. They use 30 round rifle magazines to defend themselves against criminals. That shows that 30 round rifle magazines are appropriate for self defense.


A gun is inherently dangerous and has no redeeming value such as a car which can be useds to transport people or a knife whose purpose is to cut things.
That is incorrect. Guns have much more of a redeeming value than cars or knives. They are used in both hunting and self defense, not to mention sport competitions.


Yes it does match up with reality. The AR-15 is the weapon of choice for mass murderers.
That is incorrect. Mass murderers prefer handguns.


There are no civil rights violations here.
That is incorrect. Outlawing pistol grips on a semi-auto long gun is a civil rights violation.
 
Joe's a good man.
Not really. If he was, he wouldn't be trying to violate people's civil liberties for fun.


Who in the hell needs assault rifles
Biden's mind is slipping. He doesn't know what century he is in.

Assault rifles were all but banned some 88 years ago.


and high capacity weapons unless you're a professional guard maybe.
The police use 20 round handgun magazines and 30 round rifle magazines for defense against criminals. That shows that they are appropriate for self defense.
 
All sound reasonable. But I’m for regulating them lIke full autos are.
Unconstitutional. 30 round rifle magazines are clearly appropriate for self defense. Otherwise the police wouldn't be using them.


Do you really need more then ten rounds or an assault style weapon ? If you do, get a permit and register it.
Assault style weapons were all but outlawed some 88 years ago. Biden talks about them because dementia has set in and he doesn't know what century it is.


You aren’t going to carry an assault weapon around with you.
People can keep AR-15s in their home and their car easily enough.


Thats the main advantage of an assault rifle….light carry, low recoil and firepower. Do you really think you’re going to be attacked by a herd of wild pigs in heat ? I’m assuming you live in a residential or business area and you want to use a weapon with a 600 yard killing range ? That’s ridiculous.
Not ridiculous at all. AR-15s are appropriate weapons for self defense. That's why the police use them.


Get a permit, a couple of 20 gauge shotguns that everyone in your family can shoot
Everyone in my family can shoot an AR-15.


and carry firearms you’ll always have with you…..with a permit. Hi cap 9 mm way over rated for anyone but a law Enforcement. They’re getting paid to face down multiple threats.
We have the right to protect ourselves from the same criminals. If 20 round handgun magazines are appropriate for the police, then they are also appropriate for civilians.


Really, no law abiding civilian will be affected Or limited much for self defense.
The fact that police use 20 round handgun magazines and 30 round rifle magazines shows that they are appropriate for self defense.

The fact that they are appropriate for self defense means civilians have the right to have them.


All bull crap. The policeman has a need in law enforcement for high cap pistols and full autos, just like the military does in some situations. The average citizen does not. To make such an analogy is idiotic.
That is incorrect. Ordinary people have the same right to self defense against the same criminals.


Easy. We do it for full auto weapons. We can do it for all firearms….regulate.
Except you can't regulate all firearms as if they were full autos.

People have the right to have guns that are appropriate for self defense.

People also have the right to have any gun that there is no justification for outlawing.
 
I don't know if that's the reason. We just passed our constitutional carry here in Ohio and as a CCW holder and gun advocate, I'm against the new law. In fact my friends and family who also have CCW's are against it as well.

It's just a divided issue is all. I'd rather live in Florida with the laws they have than live in one of these commie states with the laws they have any day of the week.
How many people journey to Ohio to see the sights? Is your winter weather so warm you can lay on a beach in a swimming suit or bikini and get sunburned? Do college kids go to Ohio on Spring Break.

Tourists are a big deal here in Florida and one of the reasons Florida does not have an income tax. Tourists from places like New York City can walk into a store and not realize that several of the other customers are packing heat. (Over 2,000,000 Florida residents have concealed carry permits.) What the tourists don’t see doesn’t scare the crap out of them.

I personally suspect the tourists would not be all that upset except when one noticed a cocked and locked .45 auto in a holster. Therefore I hope that someday constitutional carry will pass in Florida. It would make it easier to carry a midsize or full sized handgun in the Florida heat.

1649135945462.jpeg
 
An assault weapons ban is theater for the rubes. However, the courts have rejected every challenge to assault weapons ban, including the 1994 federal ban.
1994 did not outlaw assault weapons. It outlawed ordinary semi-auto guns.

The fact that courts have allowed our civil liberties to be violated does not mean that such violations are OK.


As for "shall not be infringed", the Supreme Court has upheld several bans, including the machine gun ban signed into law by Ronald Reagan.
You can't own a nuke, either.
People can justify restrictions on nukes and machine guns as satisfying a compelling government interest.

No such justification can be made for restrictions against pistol grips on a long gun.


The "gun grab" hoax is the best marketing ploy ever created by the gun manufacturing lobby.
OBAMAZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!
HILLAREEZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!
BIDENZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!
No hoax. They all really do want to outlaw defensive weapons like the AR-15.


Then why is the NRA opposing Biden's attempts to stop illegal gun trafficking?
My guess is because there is probably something blatantly unconstitutional about whatever Biden is trying to do there.
 

Forum List

Back
Top