Have Republicans failed to consider the consequences of their actions?

[JGalt]

It was already obvious that the constitution is something you don't give a damn about. Don't be so sure about your silly belief that most people would simply "hand in" their firearms. This isn't Australia or the UK and the right to bear arms isn't in their charters.

What they'll probably do is keep restricting the power of the weapons you can legally carry and make it harder for certain people to acquire firearms. There is pretty much 0% chance guns will ever be illegal in this country, or that anyone will go around collecting them.

The industry will always stand ready to provide innovation and ways to get around those laws. Even during the Clinton era ban where certain weapons were criminalized, the industry managed to import millions of weapons that were compliant with the ban, among them were 10 million Russian, Yugoslavian, and Chinese made SKS rifles.

That is not my problem. While I do find the number of mass shootings in this country quite disturbing (and even more disturbing is the fact that gun owners, who one would expect to be even more keen on gun safety considering their experience, seem to be completely apathetic about it, which speaks to the effectiveness of the NRA's brainwashing), I am not actually anti-gun. So that would be the government's problem.

One of the NRA's biggest accomplishments is promoting gun safety, yet you claim that are "brainwashing" people?

Not to mention, they're the oldest civil rights organization in this country. They don't discriminate against any person's right to arm themselves, white, black, yellow, red, or otherwise.

They have brainwashed people to believe that any restriction on the 2nd ammendment will lead directly to the repealing of the amendment. Which is, of course, absurd, but for many people, that is what they believe thanks to the tireless work of the NRA.

How the NRA went from backing gun control to America’s most powerful lobby group

"Since the turn of the millennium the organisation has continued to fight aggressively for its interests, battling a federal handgun ban in the Supreme Court in 2008 and blocking congressional efforts to pass tighter background check amendments in 2013 despite a 91 per cent approval rating for the measure in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

Today the NRA’s financial muscle is considerable. By some estimates it makes $1 from every gun sold. It receives annual donations from 22 firearms manufacturers including Smith & Wesson and Beretta USA.

But its real strength arguably lies in its support base. The NRA can rely on a highly organised, politically active membership, all of whom are united on a clear, single issue: saying no to gun control. Through NRA TV, first broadcast in 2014, the group cultivates its audience by presenting gun ownership as a lifestyle choice, interspersing its broadcasting with the portrayal of a nightmarish vision of contemporary America under threat on all sides, to which the only answer is for citizens to be armed and ready. “Our greatest weapon is truth,” the channel proclaims."

I'm not an NRA member, I've never given them one red cent, and they don't speak for me. Any restriction on the Second Amendment is too much. I have always believed that based on my own personal beliefs and always will, no matter what some gun-rights organization says.

 

[John Shaw]

What they'll probably do is keep restricting the power of the weapons you can legally carry and make it harder for certain people to acquire firearms. There is pretty much 0% chance guns will ever be illegal in this country, or that anyone will go around collecting them.

The industry will always stand ready to provide innovation and ways to get around those laws. Even during the Clinton era ban where certain weapons were criminalized, the industry managed to import millions of weapons that were compliant with the ban, among them were 10 million Russian, Yugoslavian, and Chinese made SKS rifles.

That is not my problem. While I do find the number of mass shootings in this country quite disturbing (and even more disturbing is the fact that gun owners, who one would expect to be even more keen on gun safety considering their experience, seem to be completely apathetic about it, which speaks to the effectiveness of the NRA's brainwashing), I am not actually anti-gun. So that would be the government's problem.

One of the NRA's biggest accomplishments is promoting gun safety, yet you claim that are "brainwashing" people?

Not to mention, they're the oldest civil rights organization in this country. They don't discriminate against any person's right to arm themselves, white, black, yellow, red, or otherwise.

They have brainwashed people to believe that any restriction on the 2nd ammendment will lead directly to the repealing of the amendment. Which is, of course, absurd, but for many people, that is what they believe thanks to the tireless work of the NRA.

How the NRA went from backing gun control to America’s most powerful lobby group

"Since the turn of the millennium the organisation has continued to fight aggressively for its interests, battling a federal handgun ban in the Supreme Court in 2008 and blocking congressional efforts to pass tighter background check amendments in 2013 despite a 91 per cent approval rating for the measure in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

Today the NRA’s financial muscle is considerable. By some estimates it makes $1 from every gun sold. It receives annual donations from 22 firearms manufacturers including Smith & Wesson and Beretta USA.

But its real strength arguably lies in its support base. The NRA can rely on a highly organised, politically active membership, all of whom are united on a clear, single issue: saying no to gun control. Through NRA TV, first broadcast in 2014, the group cultivates its audience by presenting gun ownership as a lifestyle choice, interspersing its broadcasting with the portrayal of a nightmarish vision of contemporary America under threat on all sides, to which the only answer is for citizens to be armed and ready. “Our greatest weapon is truth,” the channel proclaims."

I'm not an NRA member, I've never given them one red cent, and they don't speak for me. Any restriction on the Second Amendment is too much. I have always believed that based on my own personal beliefs and always will, no matter what some gun-rights organization says.

And your personal experience refutes their actions and effectiveness ... how, exactly?

 

[JGalt]

The industry will always stand ready to provide innovation and ways to get around those laws. Even during the Clinton era ban where certain weapons were criminalized, the industry managed to import millions of weapons that were compliant with the ban, among them were 10 million Russian, Yugoslavian, and Chinese made SKS rifles.

That is not my problem. While I do find the number of mass shootings in this country quite disturbing (and even more disturbing is the fact that gun owners, who one would expect to be even more keen on gun safety considering their experience, seem to be completely apathetic about it, which speaks to the effectiveness of the NRA's brainwashing), I am not actually anti-gun. So that would be the government's problem.

One of the NRA's biggest accomplishments is promoting gun safety, yet you claim that are "brainwashing" people?

Not to mention, they're the oldest civil rights organization in this country. They don't discriminate against any person's right to arm themselves, white, black, yellow, red, or otherwise.

They have brainwashed people to believe that any restriction on the 2nd ammendment will lead directly to the repealing of the amendment. Which is, of course, absurd, but for many people, that is what they believe thanks to the tireless work of the NRA.

How the NRA went from backing gun control to America’s most powerful lobby group

"Since the turn of the millennium the organisation has continued to fight aggressively for its interests, battling a federal handgun ban in the Supreme Court in 2008 and blocking congressional efforts to pass tighter background check amendments in 2013 despite a 91 per cent approval rating for the measure in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

Today the NRA’s financial muscle is considerable. By some estimates it makes $1 from every gun sold. It receives annual donations from 22 firearms manufacturers including Smith & Wesson and Beretta USA.

But its real strength arguably lies in its support base. The NRA can rely on a highly organised, politically active membership, all of whom are united on a clear, single issue: saying no to gun control. Through NRA TV, first broadcast in 2014, the group cultivates its audience by presenting gun ownership as a lifestyle choice, interspersing its broadcasting with the portrayal of a nightmarish vision of contemporary America under threat on all sides, to which the only answer is for citizens to be armed and ready. “Our greatest weapon is truth,” the channel proclaims."

I'm not an NRA member, I've never given them one red cent, and they don't speak for me. Any restriction on the Second Amendment is too much. I have always believed that based on my own personal beliefs and always will, no matter what some gun-rights organization says.

And your personal experience refutes their actions and effectiveness ... how, exactly?

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass about the NRA. They're doing a damned fine job, but don't ask me for any money. My opinions are based on the fact that I have been a gun owner, collector, shooter, and reloader since I was in my early teens. I know what I like and by the same token, I know what I believe.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The bill Trump signed to prevent a second government shutdown did not contain funds for Trump's wall. Trump then declared a national emergency and is attempting to go around Congress to get the funds Congress did not appropriate for his wall.

It appears as though the resolution to halt Trump's declaration of a national emergency will pass easily in the House. A number of Republicans agree that there is no national emergency and the resolution is expected to pass in the Republican Senate.

According to reports, however, there are not enough Republicans voting for the measure to override the expected Trump veto. What does that mean? It means the majority of Republicans in Congress are voting to limit the powers of Congress.


I watch a minimum of one hour of Fox News daily. Fox is euphemistically called the Trump Network because it is pro-Trump. For the past ten days as this resolution is heading for a showdown this week I have not heard one Republican address this issue. We keep hearing what Democrats say, but Republicans are mute about restricting their own powers.

If they were going to say anything, at the very least, Fox would publicize their comments. Nothing.

On this and other threads dealing with Trump's wall, his fans do not touch the subject. They don't want to talk about how their Republican representatives are voting to limit their power in Congress. They won't even talk about the horrible precedent Trump would set -- that a liberal President could get his/her funding for a pet project by overriding a Republican Congress and simply declaring a national emergency.

Have Trump and Trump Republicans lost the ability to think ahead to the consequences of their actions?

/——/ It contains 1.3 billion for the wall.

 

[miketx]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Good. That should start the revolution and all the killing you bastards have been begging for.

 

[John Shaw]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Good. That should start the revolution and all the killing you bastards have been begging for.

Just the sort of low IQ post I'd expect from you, little soldier boy.

 

[Oddball]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Do you have any idea how many unilaterally declared "national emergencies" are currently in effect?

I'm aware there are quite a few.

Oh, so you're aware, yet seem to have no objection to the litany of the ones already existing, in lieu of huffing and puffing about how the next unilateral "emergency" proclamation could really fuck us over.

Well, dude, the horse is already out of the barn...If you were really against these declarations, then you'd be calling for an end to them all...But you're not making that case.

An emergency to me is a hurricane. Not "Oh, I'm gonna see if I can get this funding through congress, but if not I'll call an emergency to circumvent that". Which Trump came right out and said was his plan. Doesn't sound like much of an emergency. It's unusual because he openly declared that his intent was just to achieve a political goal for his base.

Hurricane assistance isn't among the 20(?) standing "national emergencies"....Like I said; if you were decrying them as a matter of course, you'd have some credibility on the subject....But you're only picking on the most recent one to bitch about.

 

[edward37]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Do you have any idea how many unilaterally declared "national emergencies" are currently in effect?

I'm aware there are quite a few.

BUT none as assanine{sp} as this one

 

[The Original Tree]

The only thing Republicans should regret was not doing their Jobs when President Trump was first elected.

 

[Oddball]

The only thing Republicans should regret was not doing their Jobs when President Trump was first elected.

They haven't been doing their jobs since at least FDR.

 

[BluesLegend]

Dem's show their true colors. They threaten to take away our 2nd amendment rights and guns. They threaten to tax the crap out of us for climate change. Is anyone really surprised?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I cant wait till the Democraps try to use a gun emergency and usurp the 2nd amendment. With over 200 million gun owners in the US, and only 1 million military and police(who hate the Democraps) it will be open season on that one. But hey Dimwitocraps dont think, they just do, and the ends will justify the means...if you know what I mean..

It's not really something I give much of a damn about. Except I'm 90% sure said gun owners would just give in meekly, and the remainder who tried to fight would be arrested or eradicated.

It was already obvious that the constitution is something you don't give a damn about. Don't be so sure about your silly belief that most people would simply "hand in" their firearms. This isn't Australia or the UK and the right to bear arms isn't in their charters.

What they'll probably do is keep restricting the power of the weapons you can legally carry and make it harder for certain people to acquire firearms. There is pretty much 0% chance guns will ever be illegal in this country, or that anyone will go around collecting them.

The industry will always stand ready to provide innovation and ways to get around those laws. Even during the Clinton era ban where certain weapons were criminalized, the industry managed to import millions of weapons that were compliant with the ban, among them were 10 million Russian, Yugoslavian, and Chinese made SKS rifles.

That is not my problem. While I do find the number of mass shootings in this country quite disturbing (and even more disturbing is the fact that gun owners, who one would expect to be even more keen on gun safety considering their experience, seem to be completely apathetic about it, which speaks to the effectiveness of the NRA's brainwashing), I am not actually anti-gun. So that would be the government's problem.

Does it hurt you to wake up in the morning? You have just contradicted yourself , typical of a liberal. It isnt legal gun owners of the NRA that is committing the crimes, but dumbass liberals want to either shoot at cops(self suicide) or steal from others.

3 suspects on the run after attempting to break into gun store

 

[Pilot1]

Not surprised, Democrats are America haters and all about retribution, always unconstitutional.

 

[whitehall]

. Bill Clinton bombed a defenseless country when he was caught with his pants down and nobody seemed to care. We have a President with balls and a few timid RINO republicans left so what "consequences" do Alinsky democrats envision for Trump?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Do you have any idea how many unilaterally declared "national emergencies" are currently in effect?

How many of them were declared by a President who wanted funding that Congress had specifically denied? How many of them challenged Congressional power of the purse strings? How many national emergencies created a Constitutional crisis?

It appears that Trump's fan are too limited intellectually to see these issues. They simply say the President has the power to declare a national emergency. Well, no shyt.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Do you have any idea how many unilaterally declared "national emergencies" are currently in effect?

How many of them were declared by a President who wanted funding that Congress had specifically denied? How many of them challenged Congressional power of the purse strings? How many national emergencies created a Constitutional crisis?

It appears that Trump's fan are too limited intellectually to see these issues. They simply say the President has the power to declare a national emergency. Well, no shyt.

Obama Declared 13 National Emergencies - 11 Are Still Active - Big League Politics

Sorry Democrats, this “national emergency” business is not quite the work of “dictators.”

Conservative Tribune reports: “Of Obama’s 11 continuing national emergencies, nine of them were focused exclusively on foreign nations, while only one seemed focused on protecting America — a declaration aimed at punishing individuals “engaging in significant malicious cyber-enabled activities.”

I love it when a liberal whose IQ is around 70 tries to compete in the realm of ideas, thinking that he/she/it, knows everything. Then when they get an intellectual smack down, they will resort to the Rules for Radicals playbook.

 

[Oddball]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Do you have any idea how many unilaterally declared "national emergencies" are currently in effect?

How many of them were declared by a President who wanted funding that Congress had specifically denied? How many of them challenged Congressional power of the purse strings? How many national emergencies created a Constitutional crisis?

It appears that Trump's fan are too limited intellectually to see these issues. They simply say the President has the power to declare a national emergency. Well, no shyt.

Partisan hysterics don't change the facts.

IMO, they all should be overturned and declared null...But the only reason you're all pissy about it is because of the current prez, which makes you a hysterical hack.

 

[theHawk]

Next time a democratic president takes office, expect to see a number of "emergencies" popping up. Gun violence emergencies. Climate change emergencies. White people still exist emergencies. You name it.

Do you have any idea how many unilaterally declared "national emergencies" are currently in effect?

I'm aware there are quite a few.

Oh, so you're aware, yet seem to have no objection to the litany of the ones already existing, in lieu of huffing and puffing about how the next unilateral "emergency" proclamation could really fuck us over.

Well, dude, the horse is already out of the barn...If you were really against these declarations, then you'd be calling for an end to them all...But you're not making that case.

An emergency to me is a hurricane. Not "Oh, I'm gonna see if I can get this funding through congress, but if not I'll call an emergency to circumvent that". Which Trump came right out and said was his plan. Doesn't sound like much of an emergency. It's unusual because he openly declared that his intent was just to achieve a political goal for his base.

Illegal immigration causes more harm and damage to this country than any hurricane.

 

[blackhawk]

Neither party does President Obama didn’t when he told us he could use his phone and pen if Congress wasn’t going to do what he wanted Harry Reid didn’t when he used the nuclear option in 2013 to get cabinet nominees and lower court judges confirmed with a simple majority vote instead of 60 Mitch McConnell didn’t when he used the same option for Supreme Court nominees.

 

[Claudette]

Fox News is rated as the most fair news network, at 50% positive/negative coverage of Trump, with the others at 93% negative toward Trump.
So the facts are that even if the House and Senate pass the Motion of Disapproval, and Trump Vetoes it, the emergency stays in effect. Trump builds his wall and Nancy pounds sand, Trump wins again.
On FXN GOP pols say they wish that Trump did not declare the emergency, but its the dems' fault for not compromising and giving Trump his $5.7b. So Trump did it the hard way. Fuck the dems and their pettiness.

Yup and its the same wall Pelousy and UpChick voted for a few years ago.

You can't cure stupid.