The killer did not use an AR-15...he used a Sig....

[2aguy]

Frankly, I could probably agree with a reinstatement of the AWB as was written. The issue for ME is, we KNOW the current dolts wouldn't be happy with that, they want to seize those that are already in private hands as well, and that would not be reasonable nor fair.

This is easily proven by the fact that Obama could issue an EO ordering that no new asssault weapons may be sold in this country and the cowards in Congress would not stand up to him, but if he did that, then gun crime might actually drop and they would lose their ability to claim we need to collect guns. No one is going to agree to collecting guns if very few people are being shot.. If he tried for an EO that ordered the collection of guns though, Congress would stand up to that, OR it would fail a court challenge.

There hope is that in 5 years, 10 tops enough people will have been killed with guns that an outright collection of guns will pass and become law.

It's pathetic.

I have offered a simple solution.

1. Background checks equal to receiving a security clearance to get a license to buy guns. Once you have that license, no one keeps track of what you buy. We're not registering guns.

2. Make it an additional crime if you posses a gun without the requisite background check

3. Place flags that temporarily suspend your license if you get in trouble with the law, until things can be cleared up.

4. Mandatory minimum 10 year sentence for any crime involving a gun, this includes even if you are found in violation of #2 above.

Now, if I can figure that out, why can't Congress, or the President?

Why would you agree with the AWB, as written? What would it actually accomplish in terms of reducing the assault weapons on the streets?

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

That's why I'd agree to it, it would do nothing except for give you stupid liberals a security blanket.

So, you don't actually want to do anything to get assault weapons off the street. You just want to appear that you agree we need to get assault weapons off the street. Got it.

No, we don't, because guns aren't the problem. PEOPLE are. You bring third world people here to the US and are shocked when they continue to live by their third world culture which is overwhelmingly more violent than our own. I have actually lived and worked in the Third World. It sucks. They don't value life. They don't value anything except their immediate needs and how to meet them which usually means taking them from someone else through violent methods.

You want to disarm the law abiding who outnumber the criminals by many orders of magnitude, and you want to bring even MORE third world savages into the country with no attempt to control those who come here.

Face it dude, you're either incredibly stupid, or insane.

They don't seem to get that.

People who don't value human life will find ways to take human life. Those who do value human life will not kill people, even if they have the tools in front of them to do so.

Forgetting the 2nd Amendment for a moment, there is no reason to believe that crime would drop if guns were illegal.

Chicago is ABSOLUTE proof of this. Guns are illegal in Chicago, Has that correlated to less gun violence? Of course not because criminals don't obey laws, that's why they are fucking called criminals.

Actually, France is an even better example.....their criminals and terrorists get actual....honest to goodness, fully automatic weapons easily....

 

[2aguy]

No one is suggesting they will "magically disappear". However, yes, or no. If we make assault weapons illegal, will it make it more difficult to attain an assault weapon?

For lawful people, yes, they will disappear. For criminals, it will have no impact. This has been shown over and over and over. Were it not a fact, the war on drugs, and the prior war on liquor would have been wildly successful, and no one would be alcoholics, nor addicted to drugs.

Frankly, I could probably agree with a reinstatement of the AWB as was written. The issue for ME is, we KNOW the current dolts wouldn't be happy with that, they want to seize those that are already in private hands as well, and that would not be reasonable nor fair.

This is easily proven by the fact that Obama could issue an EO ordering that no new asssault weapons may be sold in this country and the cowards in Congress would not stand up to him, but if he did that, then gun crime might actually drop and they would lose their ability to claim we need to collect guns. No one is going to agree to collecting guns if very few people are being shot.. If he tried for an EO that ordered the collection of guns though, Congress would stand up to that, OR it would fail a court challenge.

There hope is that in 5 years, 10 tops enough people will have been killed with guns that an outright collection of guns will pass and become law.

It's pathetic.

I have offered a simple solution.

1. Background checks equal to receiving a security clearance to get a license to buy guns. Once you have that license, no one keeps track of what you buy. We're not registering guns.

2. Make it an additional crime if you posses a gun without the requisite background check

3. Place flags that temporarily suspend your license if you get in trouble with the law, until things can be cleared up.

4. Mandatory minimum 10 year sentence for any crime involving a gun, this includes even if you are found in violation of #2 above.

Now, if I can figure that out, why can't Congress, or the President?

WE should do what Japan does....they have a 30 year sentence for gun crimes...now even the Yakuza are reluctant to use them.

We should have a general background check for citizens that would count for job background checks..that way you could hide who was getting the check to buy a gun...that would work better than that license.

I have to disagree on it though.....licensing gun owners is not necessary. The background check at the gun store is enough. Felons can be arrested if they are caught with a gun...so if you are stopped by police and have a gun on you, they can run your i.d. and see if you have any convictions...if you do, you are arrested, if not, you go on your way...as we see in New York, New Jersey and other places...any licensing scheme can be used to deny law abiding people acces to guns.

The flag on your name....that might work....have to flesh it out more.

Listen though, if you license owners, you don't have to go through the background check rigamorale every time you want to purchase ammo or even a new gun. You just hand the guy your ID he sends it through the reader. Clear and no flags, no problem you get to buy your stuff right on the spot.

I would even go one step further, let's implement The Real ID Act , right now and then your state ID will have a chip on it just like your credit card and you wouldn't even need a separate ID to buy guns, the information stored on your DL would indicate that you are cleared to vote, cleared to buy guns, and whatever else the government needs to know.

Now think about what I just proposed as to compared to the current background check, where it's a simple matter of comparing back ground check to store receipt to tell exactly what gun you now own. It's a defacto gun registration.

Done my way , no records are even kept after your initial background check is passed. Unless things change and your clearance is removed.

So there is no record to compare to gun store receipts.

You can't license a Right. The second you do it is no longer a Right. Furthermore, once a licensing scheme is in place it is but a minor step to placing restrictions on those licenses that make it impossible for anyone but those people the politicians like to obtain them.

It is a foolish person who actually believes the government won't give itself more power.

Yep...anyone can get a permit to carry a gun in New York...you just have to be allowed to get the permit.......even John Stossel, from ABCs 20/20 and Fox Business news couldn't get a permit to carry in New York...

 

[2aguy]

So, you don't actually want to do anything to get assault weapons off the street. You just want to appear that you agree we need to get assault weapons off the street. Got it.

No, we don't, because guns aren't the problem. PEOPLE are. You bring third world people here to the US and are shocked when they continue to live by their third world culture which is overwhelmingly more violent than our own. I have actually lived and worked in the Third World. It sucks. They don't value life. They don't value anything except their immediate needs and how to meet them which usually means taking them from someone else through violent methods.

You want to disarm the law abiding who outnumber the criminals by many orders of magnitude, and you want to bring even MORE third world savages into the country with no attempt to control those who come here.

Face it dude, you're either incredibly stupid, or insane.

They don't seem to get that.

People who don't value human life will find ways to take human life. Those who do value human life will not kill people, even if they have the tools in front of them to do so.

Forgetting the 2nd Amendment for a moment, there is no reason to believe that crime would drop if guns were illegal.

Chicago is ABSOLUTE proof of this. Guns are illegal in Chicago, Has that correlated to less gun violence? Of course not because criminals don't obey laws, that's why they are fucking called criminals.

However, certain tools make the taking of human lives in large numbers much easier. And we should regulate who gets those tools. I have had my .250 Savage for over 50 years. I am quite proficient with it. However, five shots and I am out of ammo, have to revoad from the top. Very efficient gun for deer and elk. Not so much for a crowded night club. More than adaquete for self defense, don't recollect anyone having to take on an army around here recently. And even with a belt fed BAR, you will lose if you are taking on an army.

Doesn't matter. The worst mass killing at a nightclub in US history was the asshole in New York who burned 70 some odd people to death with a gallon of gasoline. Evil people do evil things and they will always find a way to do it. Far better to keep the third world savages OUT of this country don't you think? hat we can do. That actually works. Why is it you insist on bringing predators to this country to rape and murder our peaceful people? I am curious as to why you think that that is OK.

And how many times has this happened in the last 20 years versus the number of incidents of crazies killing multiple people with assault weapons? A true assholes arguement, Mr. Westwall. There is a rising tide of disgust with you mentally ill gun nuts that enable these massacres.

about 2 a year with rifles....knives kill more people each and every year than assault rifles have done in the last 10 years...

Bare hands have killed more people each and every year than assault rifes have in the past 10 years...

clubs have killed more people each and every year than assault rifles have killed in the past 10 years...

Please....do some research before you post...you will look more intelligent...

 

[2aguy]

So, you don't actually want to do anything to get assault weapons off the street. You just want to appear that you agree we need to get assault weapons off the street. Got it.

No, we don't, because guns aren't the problem. PEOPLE are. You bring third world people here to the US and are shocked when they continue to live by their third world culture which is overwhelmingly more violent than our own. I have actually lived and worked in the Third World. It sucks. They don't value life. They don't value anything except their immediate needs and how to meet them which usually means taking them from someone else through violent methods.

You want to disarm the law abiding who outnumber the criminals by many orders of magnitude, and you want to bring even MORE third world savages into the country with no attempt to control those who come here.

Face it dude, you're either incredibly stupid, or insane.

They don't seem to get that.

People who don't value human life will find ways to take human life. Those who do value human life will not kill people, even if they have the tools in front of them to do so.

Forgetting the 2nd Amendment for a moment, there is no reason to believe that crime would drop if guns were illegal.

Chicago is ABSOLUTE proof of this. Guns are illegal in Chicago, Has that correlated to less gun violence? Of course not because criminals don't obey laws, that's why they are fucking called criminals.

However, certain tools make the taking of human lives in large numbers much easier. And we should regulate who gets those tools. I have had my .250 Savage for over 50 years. I am quite proficient with it. However, five shots and I am out of ammo, have to revoad from the top. Very efficient gun for deer and elk. Not so much for a crowded night club. More than adaquete for self defense, don't recollect anyone having to take on an army around here recently. And even with a belt fed BAR, you will lose if you are taking on an army.

Doesn't matter. The worst mass killing at a nightclub in US history was the asshole in New York who burned 70 some odd people to death with a gallon of gasoline. Evil people do evil things and they will always find a way to do it. Far better to keep the third world savages OUT of this country don't you think? hat we can do. That actually works. Why is it you insist on bringing predators to this country to rape and murder our peaceful people? I am curious as to why you think that that is OK.

And how many times has this happened in the last 20 years versus the number of incidents of crazies killing multiple people with assault weapons? A true assholes arguement, Mr. Westwall. There is a rising tide of disgust with you mentally ill gun nuts that enable these massacres.

So....my source......Mother Jones....has a record of mass shootings from 1982....

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2016: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

Total deaths from "Assault" rifles since 2006......106 over 10 years.....( 2006-2016)

And I will show you how many were murdered with knives, clubs and bare hands....

From the FBI homicide table 8, weapons used to commit murder...

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

2014....

Knives..... 1,567 in 2014 vs 106 for Assault rifles in 10 years including Sunday's....

Hands and feet....660 in 2014 vs. 106 for assault rifles in 10 years......

clubs.... 435 in 2014 vs. 106 for assault rifles for the last 10 years....

So tell us oh genius...which is more of a problem....assault weapons or knives, clubs, and bare hands....?

 

[2aguy]

Notice...the knives, clubs and bare hand deaths were for just one year...the deaths by alleged "assault" weapons...over 10 years......

So again...looking at those numbers...which are more dangerous each year....?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

You're being hard headed and obtuse my friend.

The system I proposed does NOTHING to harm your rights as long as you don't break the law, while at the same ensuring that we are doing everything we can to ensure that those who shouldn't have weapons don't have legal access to them.

But it does. That's the point. Who regulates licenses? The Government. Who has been pushing for gun control. The Government. Why did the Founders write the 2nd Amendment in the first place. TO LIMIT GOVERNMENT. That's why it is a Right and not a "good idea". The second you give your power (your Rights) to the Government, the Government will begin working on ways to get even more power. Then, when the Government has enough power, inevitably, it will begin figuring out ways to get rid of those people it doesn't like. That is the natural evolution of Government throughout time.

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

THe intent? Son you need to read up, the founding fathers INTENDED for gun ownership to be regulated. That's a fact.

And that is exactly what my proposal does, it regulates gun ownership. NOT GUNS. If you have the little license (or whatever term you choose to use , it wouldn't be an actual license) you can own any firearm you like, from a .38 revolver to an M4, I don't care. And how many of each you own is no one's business. All we the people l(and that is after all what the government is SUPPOSED to be) care about is "are you allowed to exercise your right? Now without this "license" how would the government POSSIBLY be able to know if you were allowed to exercise this right or not?

They of course would NOT be able to. You are coming across as someone who wants NO regulations on who may or may not have a gun.

I suggest you read The Federalist Papers then, and the various collections of the Founders letters as well. I have read far more on the subject than you ever will.

LOL okay bro. If you were just studied up on the matter you would KNOW that the colonials actually mandated gun registration, as every adult male had to have a musket and shot and that was kept track of by the government.

Among other things.

Really? Care to show us one of these gun registration lists? They don't exist because they never existed. The local militia commanders had lists of the PEOPLE (I actually own one of those lists) but there is no mention of what weapon they had. None at all.

That is what I advocate dude. Read what i wrote. The FBI knows if you're cleared to buy guns and can pass that information to sellers. There is no record of what guns you own. None.

 

[westwall]

But it does. That's the point. Who regulates licenses? The Government. Who has been pushing for gun control. The Government. Why did the Founders write the 2nd Amendment in the first place. TO LIMIT GOVERNMENT. That's why it is a Right and not a "good idea". The second you give your power (your Rights) to the Government, the Government will begin working on ways to get even more power. Then, when the Government has enough power, inevitably, it will begin figuring out ways to get rid of those people it doesn't like. That is the natural evolution of Government throughout time.

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

THe intent? Son you need to read up, the founding fathers INTENDED for gun ownership to be regulated. That's a fact.

And that is exactly what my proposal does, it regulates gun ownership. NOT GUNS. If you have the little license (or whatever term you choose to use , it wouldn't be an actual license) you can own any firearm you like, from a .38 revolver to an M4, I don't care. And how many of each you own is no one's business. All we the people l(and that is after all what the government is SUPPOSED to be) care about is "are you allowed to exercise your right? Now without this "license" how would the government POSSIBLY be able to know if you were allowed to exercise this right or not?

They of course would NOT be able to. You are coming across as someone who wants NO regulations on who may or may not have a gun.

I suggest you read The Federalist Papers then, and the various collections of the Founders letters as well. I have read far more on the subject than you ever will.

LOL okay bro. If you were just studied up on the matter you would KNOW that the colonials actually mandated gun registration, as every adult male had to have a musket and shot and that was kept track of by the government.

Among other things.

Really? Care to show us one of these gun registration lists? They don't exist because they never existed. The local militia commanders had lists of the PEOPLE (I actually own one of those lists) but there is no mention of what weapon they had. None at all.

That is what I advocate dude. Read what i wrote. The FBI knows if you're cleared to buy guns and can pass that information to sellers. There is no record of what guns you own. None.

They can ALREADY do that without a license.

 

[Claudette]

there is no civilian lawful purpose for this military grade weapon...

SIG SAUER developed the MCX rifle for America’s special forces.


While the SIG SAUER MCX kinda looks like a standard AR-15, there’s one major difference: it’s gas piston operated. Buffer and gas tube? Gone. SIG’s replaced them with a short stroke gas piston and a compact recoil system contained completely within the upper receiver. To provide the force necessary to stop the bolt carrier’s rearward movement and return it to battery after each round, the MCX features a pair of recoil springs directly attached to the bolt carrier. Because the recoil springs are housed where an AR-15’s charging handle would normally sit the charging handle has been moved slightly higher than normal on the receiver.

When you run a suppressed rifle the added back pressure from the silencer creates additional force to the bolt carrier, which makes the rifle cycle faster. That’s not good; it can become uncontrollable and cause excessive wear on the operating bits. The MCX has an adjustable gas system that changes the amount of gas being sent to the piston, controlling the cycle rate. The system’s equipped with a gas regulator that the shooter can adjust on the fly.

[NB: There are currently two MCX version on the market. The first (sold through Cabela’s) uses a self-regulating gas system that vents super-heated gas directly into the air to control the pressure. The latest and now official version uses a closed system manually adjusted from “suppressed” to “unsuppressed.” The official word from SIG SAUER: the adjustable gas system was done on request, but they settled on the manual system to make the civilian MCX be as close as possible to the military MCX.]

Gun Review: SIG SAUER MCX - The Truth About Guns

Sure there is. If I want one then I can buy one. The Founders were far more worried about an illegitimate government abusing its power than they were about an invading army thus the 2nd Amendment is about the ability of the American public to own the very same weapons that were used by the military's of the world. Including our own.

And based on the corruption in our government that is now demonstrated on a daily basis, they were correct in doing so.

I agree. That's exactly why the FF put the second Amendment in there. So we the people could protect ourselves against our own Govt. if need be.


Gun control is a bunch of bullshit. If someone has the money there is a huge black market out there for guns and other weapons. Not to mention arms dealers in both America and Europe. If you have the money you can buy almost anything.

All gun control does is stop honest folks from buying what they need to defend themselves. Criminals get their guns anywhere but at a gun store.

 

[Crixus]

there is no civilian lawful purpose for this military grade weapon...

SIG SAUER developed the MCX rifle for America’s special forces.


While the SIG SAUER MCX kinda looks like a standard AR-15, there’s one major difference: it’s gas piston operated. Buffer and gas tube? Gone. SIG’s replaced them with a short stroke gas piston and a compact recoil system contained completely within the upper receiver. To provide the force necessary to stop the bolt carrier’s rearward movement and return it to battery after each round, the MCX features a pair of recoil springs directly attached to the bolt carrier. Because the recoil springs are housed where an AR-15’s charging handle would normally sit the charging handle has been moved slightly higher than normal on the receiver.

When you run a suppressed rifle the added back pressure from the silencer creates additional force to the bolt carrier, which makes the rifle cycle faster. That’s not good; it can become uncontrollable and cause excessive wear on the operating bits. The MCX has an adjustable gas system that changes the amount of gas being sent to the piston, controlling the cycle rate. The system’s equipped with a gas regulator that the shooter can adjust on the fly.

[NB: There are currently two MCX version on the market. The first (sold through Cabela’s) uses a self-regulating gas system that vents super-heated gas directly into the air to control the pressure. The latest and now official version uses a closed system manually adjusted from “suppressed” to “unsuppressed.” The official word from SIG SAUER: the adjustable gas system was done on request, but they settled on the manual system to make the civilian MCX be as close as possible to the military MCX.]

Gun Review: SIG SAUER MCX - The Truth About Guns

There is no lawful reason for a person to own a race car either other then they want to. Same for what ever guns.

 

[Wilbur Right]

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

Interesting. We have an almost completely dysfunctional federal government. That accomplishes virtually nothing, solves no problems and offers no solutions.

And you believe the founders intended it to be this way? Bullshit.

 

[Wilbur Right]

control is a bunch of bullshit. If someone has the money there is a huge black market out there for guns and other weapons. Not to mention arms dealers in both America and Europe. If you have the money you can buy almost anything.

All gun control does is stop honest folks from buying what they need to defend themselves. Criminals get their guns anywhere but at a gun store.

People can buy whatever gun they want if they have the money.
According to you.

Where is this gun control being practiced that has you gun nutters so freaked out?

 

[Claudette]

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

Interesting. We have an almost completely dysfunctional federal government. That accomplishes virtually nothing, solves no problems and offers no solutions.

And you believe the founders intended it to be this way? Bullshit.

The FF wanted the power to go to the States, not a central government.

The Federal Govt. has, over time, assumed all power and the States are left to go along.

Case in point. The States being forced by the Fed to take in those Syrian refugee's.

Thirty one States don't them and 53% of Americans don't want them in our country.

The Fed, i.e. the current douchebag in WH has ignored what the States and the American people want.

Power of the Federal Government.

 

[Claudette]

control is a bunch of bullshit. If someone has the money there is a huge black market out there for guns and other weapons. Not to mention arms dealers in both America and Europe. If you have the money you can buy almost anything.

All gun control does is stop honest folks from buying what they need to defend themselves. Criminals get their guns anywhere but at a gun store.

People can buy whatever gun they want if they have the money.
According to you.

Where is this gun control being practiced that has you gun nutters so freaked out?

Use your brain numbnuts. Criminals don't buy guns at gun stores, they buy them on the streets.

The gun is the tool. The person using it is the weapon.

As for gun nutters?? Just a term used by idiots who don't like guns. Of course they can always wait for the police to show up if someone breaks into their homes. If they get the chance to call them that is.

You have no common sense at all.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Google is your friend. Look it up. Its common sense. Criminals buy their guns on the streets, not from a gun sto

Follow your own advice and try Google.

Criminals buy guns on the street......after someone stole them from your house or car.
Criminals buy guns from private sellers.
Criminals use "straw buyers" to acquire guns from gun stores.
Some criminal even had guns before they became criminals.
Criminals even go to gun shows and buy weapons.


But again, if you believe criminals are buying all their weapons off the streets, where is this powerful gun control gun nutters are freaked out about. Doesn't sound like much "control" to me if I can buy guns off the street.

And yep I have guns. For over 35 years. Never shot anyone..never even had to use my gun for self defense. My guns are just hanging out in a gun safe with each other.

 

[Claudette]

Google is your friend. Look it up. Its common sense. Criminals buy their guns on the streets, not from a gun sto

Follow your own advice and try Google.

Criminals buy guns on the street......after someone stole them from your house or car.
Criminals buy guns from private sellers.
Criminals use "straw buyers" to acquire guns from gun stores.
Some criminal even had guns before they became criminals.
Criminals even go to gun shows and buy weapons.


But again, if you believe criminals are buying all their weapons off the streets, where is this powerful gun control gun nutters are freaked out about. Doesn't sound like much "control" to me if I can buy guns off the street.

And yep I have guns. For over 35 years. Never shot anyone..never even had to use my gun for self defense. My guns are just hanging out in a gun safe with each other.

You think I don't know they buy them on the streets??

There is a black market for guns in the US.

Forbes Welcome

Inside the Black Market for Guns

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/21/us/crimi
nals-black-market-in-guns-detailed.html

I've worked in law enforcement for over twenty years. Its a big topic among theLEO's I work with.

 

[Rustic]

Google is your friend. Look it up. Its common sense. Criminals buy their guns on the streets, not from a gun sto

Follow your own advice and try Google.

Criminals buy guns on the street......after someone stole them from your house or car.
Criminals buy guns from private sellers.
Criminals use "straw buyers" to acquire guns from gun stores.
Some criminal even had guns before they became criminals.
Criminals even go to gun shows and buy weapons.


But again, if you believe criminals are buying all their weapons off the streets, where is this powerful gun control gun nutters are freaked out about. Doesn't sound like much "control" to me if I can buy guns off the street.

And yep I have guns. For over 35 years. Never shot anyone..never even had to use my gun for self defense. My guns are just hanging out in a gun safe with each other.

The only nutters are the ones pushing for more gun laws...

 

[westwall]

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

Interesting. We have an almost completely dysfunctional federal government. That accomplishes virtually nothing, solves no problems and offers no solutions.

And you believe the founders intended it to be this way? Bullshit.

Yes, that WAS the intent. Take a look at how the government was formed in the first place! It is by design adversarial.

 

[2aguy]

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

Interesting. We have an almost completely dysfunctional federal government. That accomplishes virtually nothing, solves no problems and offers no solutions.

And you believe the founders intended it to be this way? Bullshit.

Yep...there were very specific things the founders wanted the federal government to do...and that was it....they purposefully set up checks on the power of the government to keep it from becoming too powerful.....you lefties don't understand that and you want to give them more and more power........

 

[Crixus]

That's why the Founders made that process as difficult as possible. Our very system of government was set up to be adversarial. That was the INTENT. The Founders didn't want the government to be all nice and working together because they KNEW that when government works for itself it does so at the expense of the PEOPLE.

Interesting. We have an almost completely dysfunctional federal government. That accomplishes virtually nothing, solves no problems and offers no solutions.

And you believe the founders intended it to be this way? Bullshit.

We can only speculate what the founding fathers intended and that could make for interesting conversation. But legally it their intent means nothing because they are long dead and we have what we have.