Dem Sen Murphy: there's not enough votes for assault weapons ban: "I don't get why we choose to live like this with kids in fear. only in America"

[AZrailwhale]

I don't care what this supreme court says.

Why, because for the first time in decades it isn’t packed with reliable liberals?

 

[multivita-man]

Why, because for the first time in decades it isn’t packed with reliable liberals?

Merrick Garland should be on the SCOTUS instead of Neil Gorsuch. I don't mean that Gorsuch is a bad guy or a bad justice, but McConnell rigged the process.

 

[80zephyr]

Merrick Garland should be on the SCOTUS instead of Neil Gorsuch. I don't mean that Gorsuch is a bad guy or a bad justice, but McConnell rigged the process.

You mean exactly like the Dems would have done if the situation was reversed?

 

[multivita-man]

You mean exactly like the Dems would have done if the situation was reversed?

There was no reason to block his confirmation hearing. I don't disagree with you that both sides have become hyper-partisan when it comes to court nominations, but at least follow the traditional process. Garland/Gorsuch was bad enough, but then to turn around and go full-on hypocrite with the nomination and confirmation of Coney-Barrett was adding disgrace on top of disgrace.

 

[80zephyr]

There was no reason to block his confirmation hearing. I don't disagree with you that both sides have become hyper-partisan when it comes to court nominations, but at least follow the traditional process. Garland/Gorsuch was bad enough, but then to turn around and go full-on hypocrite with the nomination and confirmation of Coney-Barrett was adding disgrace on top of disgrace.

I agree. They should still have followed the process.

 

[multivita-man]

I agree. They should still have followed the process.

I think that's one of my biggest complaints with the modern GOP, and to be fair, Dems do it too (gerrymandering state districts, etc). For democracy to work, there has to be an understanding that rules shouldn't be gamed just because they can be gamed, just because a party or faction has the power to do it. I'm not a fan of slippery slope arguments, but if there's an appropriate example, this would be it.

Once one side decides that it's going to rig the system, whether it's Daley's Chicago Machine of the 1960s or McConnell's Senate, it becomes a race to the bottom. And I think that's where we are in this country and I don't think it ends well for most people, Democrat, Republican, or Independent. The billionaires, as usual, will be fine. They can even fuck off to some other country if things get too hot for them here. We're the ones holding the bag.

 

[progressive hunter]

There was no reason to block his confirmation hearing. I don't disagree with you that both sides have become hyper-partisan when it comes to court nominations, but at least follow the traditional process. Garland/Gorsuch was bad enough, but then to turn around and go full-on hypocrite with the nomination and confirmation of Coney-Barrett was adding disgrace on top of disgrace.

of course there was a reason and it shows itself by his using the AGs office as a political weapon,,

imagine if that mother fucker was on SCOTUS for life??

 

[hadit]

Banning guns in an attempt to stop mass shootings is no more effective than putting a bandage on an open cancer tumor, IOW, it's treating a symptom that doesn't address the underlying problem. We've had guns readily available since the founding of the nation, and much more readily available in the past, yet only recently have we seen nutcases shooting up shopping malls and schools. Why do we always start AND stop with guns and never look at the underlying problems? I ask all those who want to ban guns, especially the ones that are big, black and scary looking, but no more deadly than the pretty ones, to answer this. Why ONLY the guns and nothing about the causes and treatments of mental illness?

Is it really because guns make an easy soundbite target and mental illness is too hard to treat?

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is the proliferation and ease of attaining weapons of semi-automatic capability and high cap magazines that can mow down 15 people before someone can scream.

Most mass shootings are committed with handguns.
Most people killed in mass shootings are killed with handguns.
There are ~20,000,000 ARs in the US; in 2022, 8 werre used to kill 54 people in mass shootings.

Your statement is false.

And you don't care.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Merrick Garland should be on the SCOTUS instead of Neil Gorsuch. I don't mean that Gorsuch is a bad guy or a bad justice, but McConnell rigged the process.

Welcome to hardball politics.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I don't care what this supreme court says.

You may not care what the USSC says, but you don't get to ignore it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That's because the laws don't go after the massive number of guns in this country. Do that, and you'd see a significant reduction in deaths and violence.

Unsupportable nonsense.

 

[multivita-man]

of course there was a reason and it shows itself by his using the AGs office as a political weapon,,

imagine if that mother fucker was on SCOTUS for life??

Well if what you're saying is true and Garland is weaponizing the AG's office, then he wouldn't be doing it right now had McConnell just gone ahead with the confirmation as he should have.

Of course AG Garland is not weaponizing the office and hasn't even brought charges against your MAGA God, but if he does, Trump will have due process as required by the Constitution. That's what you're afraid of, though.

 

[multivita-man]

Welcome to hardball politics.

Nah, I reject that. I understand it's political reality in 2023, but that's not how a healthy republic operates. There are unwritten rules that are necessary if self-rule is to work.

 

[multivita-man]

You may not care what the USSC says, but you don't get to ignore it.

That much, I agree with.

 

[multivita-man]

Unsupportable nonsense.

Nope, not at all. Every other modern, developed, politically-stable nation on earth has gun control laws that are clearly more effective than ours. You can cover your ears and eyes and scream "Nah! Nah! Nah! I can't hear you!" all you want, but the evidence is there. You just have to acknowledge that America's a nation-state like all others and not a separate universe with its own special laws of physics.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Nope, not at all. Every other modern, developed, politically-stable nation on earth has gun control laws that are clearly more effective than ours.

Really..
Pick one.
-Show the rate of gun-related violent crime prior to the implementation of their laws
-Show the rate of gun-related violent crime after the implementation of their laws
-Demonstrate the necessary relationship between those laws and the decline in gun-related violent crime.

That is, demonstrate that the implementation of the laws caused the decrease in rate.

 

[progressive hunter]

Well if what you're saying is true and Garland is weaponizing the AG's office, then he wouldn't be doing it right now had McConnell just gone ahead with the confirmation as he should have.

Of course AG Garland is not weaponizing the office and hasn't even brought charges against your MAGA God, but if he does, Trump will have due process as required by the Constitution. That's what you're afraid of, though.

he would be doiing worse by using his seat in SCOTUs to fuck the people,,

and of course hes using his office as a political weapon,, you just dont see it because youre just another useful idiot,,

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Nope, not at all. Every other modern, developed, politically-stable nation on earth has gun control laws that are clearly more effective than ours. You can cover your ears and eyes and scream "Nah! Nah! Nah! I can't hear you!" all you want, but the evidence is there. You just have to acknowledge that America's a nation-state like all others and not a separate universe with its own special laws of physics.

2nd Amendment. Go ahead and try to repeal it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

2nd Amendment. Go ahead and try to repeal it.

The enshrinement of constitutional rights -- necessarily and intentionally -- takes certain policy choices off the table