Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He's talking about state law, and there's no logical or constitutional reason that states cannot prohibit the sale of firearms to all persons under the age of 21 except military personnel. In fact, I know of no reason why such a federal stipulation would not be constitutional.then make it age to 21 to get into the military too. people wan t their cake and eat it too.
Well, the only thing I was giving a thumbs up to, was that I agreed with White, that Matt seems well meaning, caring, and coherent to me as well.More to the point, White 6's response in this instance suggests that I was referring to Matt's speech but that's nonsensical. To see why I wasn't and why White 6's response to my post is nonsensical, all you have to do is trace the exchange between me and him backwards via clicking on the arrows beside our names in the posts. I generally agree with Matt, though not necessarily over all the specifics vis-a-vis the Democrats' proposed legislation.
Brain deadIt totally fits
Like a jury conviction...beyond any reasonable doubt.So still assumption on your part.
Hence why you can’t logically claim that it’s zero percent.
You’re just assuming what you’re trying to claim.
Well, the only thing I was giving a thumbs up to, was that I agreed with White, that Matt seems well meaning, caring, and coherent to me as well.
Now? Do I agree with Matt's policy prescriptions? NO, I DO NOT.
But then? Most folks know that I have different sources of information, and a different POV on this whole push to decrease the impact of the 2nd, from the get go, so, this should not be a surprise.
I am a classical liberal, who keenly understands, WHY the 2nd Amendment is in the Constitution in the first place.
It does not matter HOW many civilians or children die, if we wish to remain having an open society, IT NEEDS TO STAY THERE.
So? The choice, is either a closed society, ruled by a technocracy of bureaucrats, or? A society with the people still in charge.
THIS? . . . is more important than any other consideration. The choice now, is liberty or security, there is no other. And I honestly don't think there will be any security when it comes right down to it.
The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
So you’re assuming what you’re trying to claim.Like a jury conviction...beyond reasonable doubt.
No you won't. You just rigged the game from the start. Who do you think you're fooling?
Actor Matthew McConaughey gives impassioned speech for gun reform in White House briefing
Actor Matthew McConaughey delivered an emotional White House appeal for gun regulations in the wake of last month's massacre in his hometown of Uvalde, Texas.www.cnbc.com
He is talking for gun owners? No gun owner I ever listen to talk talks like this. Does he own a gun? When he starts talking about what the government is going to do about criminals and guns instead of hurting legal gun owners. Then maybe I will listen.
I know what you're trying say, badly, and your narrative is still bullshit. It's mindless, gun-grabbing Democrats who falsely characterize things. The matter foremostly entails a spiritual, moral, and cultural problem caused by Democrats, the same folks who routinely oppose proper school security and foist the deathtraps of gun-free zones on America.It means the gun lobby and it's supporters have successfully framed (in the past) any attempt to reign in this ongoing problem, by falsely characterizing the discussion as an attack on the 2nd amendment, with the overriding importance going to 2A, while nothing is done of the clear and present ongoing danger.
Absolutely not.So you’re assuming what you’re trying to claim.
I’ll take “circular logic” for $500, Alex.
You’re still assuming what you’re trying to claim. Really bad argument.Absolutely not.
The average person standard.
Would you be dissuaded?
You have decided to...shoot up a badminton tournament...you go to get a gun and you are turned down by the FFL.
Honestly...would that stop you?
Not a chance.
Not going to stop anyone else either...no matter how obtuse you attempt to be.
I don't ever expect you to admit you are wrong....that's not in a leftists nature...but you are.
I know it, and you know it.
You can have the last word.
The developmental concerns of persons under the age of 21 are real. Military personnel under the age of 21 need not be prohibited. They would have the vetted maturity, training, and discipline.I'll never be in favor of universal background checks.
It is nothing but defacto registration.
And these guys all PASSED BACKROUND CHECKS. They bought rifles from FFLs and filled out form 4473 and then took the rifles and committed murder with them.
The guy in Buffalo WAS INVESTIGATED under New York's RED FLAG LAW that was passed in 2019...and deemed not to be a threat.
. Read that again!
All these shooters passed background checks...and New York HAS A RED FLAG LAW THAT THE BUFFALO SHOOTER WAS INVESTIGATED UNDER AND DEEMED NOT A THREAT.
Gun grabbers are always looking for an excuse to further THEIR goals.
If their solutions worked...there would have been no shooting in Buffalo. That's a cast iron, set in stone fact.
You cannot give an inch on proposal that haven't worked and won't work.
Look...for 50 years we gave them "safe, legal and rare" abortions and where did that end up.
Abortions at nine months and talk of post birth abortion.
Nope...never without a fight.
Why the would you agree to infringement of the rights of millions of 18, 19, and 20 year over the actions of 10 people?
Would you do that with the right to peacably assemble?
How about free speech?
Or religious freedom?
The answer is always no to infringement.
We're not going to throw millions of young adults under the bus to satiate the gun confiscators.
I know, and as I have posted, I agreed with those parts.He spoke about mental health
What don't you get?Keenly understand?!
Hard to argue with the points he made.I cannot post the video, not out yet, but it will undoubtedly be available later. No matter what side of the gun debate, or what party you belong to, or like me, not a party member, you need to see his presentation, on the Uvalde shooting and his plea for reforms to stop this ongoing carnage across our country.
As a gun owner, raised with guns, trained to be responsible with weapons by my own dad, I can say I support his message of being able to advance legislation that will move us forward and indeed make the 2nd amendment even more relevant, than we are being sold by both sides of the political divide. Saying the 2nd amendment is paramount to considerations of protecting our kids, our schools, our churches, our public spaces, must take precedence. To do otherwise, out of hand, as usual is bullshit.
I was as surprised as anyone. This guy actually did strike a middle ground with sensible comments about responding to recent events and bolstering American values. Worth a watch.
Give it a rest, Dr. Phil.So many here bitch about actors and don't realize they are actors also. Complete with scripts of their choosing.
Yeah, I missed that too. I'm going to borrow your question for White 6.Missed it.
Did he mention the increasing number of Soros funded Chief Prosecutors and 'Let 'em go' Judges along with the laws on the books that aren't enforced??
White 6 has a bad habit of "falsely characterizing the discussion."who said nothing should be done??
whats being said is all the laws in the world wont stop a criminal and only effect law abiding people
In case
That clown is who the filthy Democrats hired to be their shrill so the RINOs can have cover to side with the Democrats to take away our Constitutional rights.
