The Next President of the United States: II

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
1002

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

1003

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together.

1004

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.

1005

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.

1006

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.

1007

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.
[/quote]

I cannot disagree with you more my friend. The government is too smart to take everyone’s gun in one swoop. They chisel away at things to not arouse the people. For example, If the government decided that you could own one or two guns per person, but wanted the rest people would rationalize that away. Or they could keep their long guns but give up their hand guns etc. I have no idea how they would do it but it would be similar to that. And eventually they’d go back for a little more.

Keep in mind that people are basically sheep and they will eventually do what Uncle Sam wants them to do. This isn’t the 1880’s and the men of today are quite a bit more docile than they used to be. Oh there are some who would resist and they would be made examples of.

1008

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.
[/quote]

I cannot disagree with you more my friend. The government is too smart to take everyone’s gun in one swoop. They chisel away at things to not arouse the people. For example, If the government decided that you could own one or two guns per person, but wanted the rest people would rationalize that away. Or they could keep their long guns but give up their hand guns etc. I have no idea how they would do it but it would be similar to that. And eventually they’d go back for a little more.

Keep in mind that people are basically sheep and they will eventually do what Uncle Sam wants them to do. This isn’t the 1880’s and the men of today are quite a bit more docile than they used to be. Oh there are some who would resist and they would be made examples of.

[/quote]

For now they don’t even need to do this much and accomplish their goal. Gun ownership has been in decline just because of urban growth and the stigma of owning one. How many born this year will own one in 50 years even if there is no “gun ban”? I could shoot in my back yard growing up, I can’t now and its not because of any laws.

1009

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.
[/quote]

I cannot disagree with you more my friend. The government is too smart to take everyone’s gun in one swoop. They chisel away at things to not arouse the people. For example, If the government decided that you could own one or two guns per person, but wanted the rest people would rationalize that away. Or they could keep their long guns but give up their hand guns etc. I have no idea how they would do it but it would be similar to that. And eventually they’d go back for a little more.

Keep in mind that people are basically sheep and they will eventually do what Uncle Sam wants them to do. This isn’t the 1880’s and the men of today are quite a bit more docile than they used to be. Oh there are some who would resist and they would be made examples of.

[/quote]

For now they don’t even need to do this much and accomplish their goal. Gun ownership has been in decline just because of urban growth and the stigma of owning one. How many born this year will own one in 50 years even if there is no “gun ban”? I could shoot in my back yard growing up, I can’t now and its not because of any laws.
[/quote]

Gun ownership is not down according to this article.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-vespa/2013/03/11/what-decline-new-york-times-uses-poll-suggest-sharp-drop-gun-ownership

1010

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.
[/quote]

I cannot disagree with you more my friend. The government is too smart to take everyone’s gun in one swoop. They chisel away at things to not arouse the people. For example, If the government decided that you could own one or two guns per person, but wanted the rest people would rationalize that away. Or they could keep their long guns but give up their hand guns etc. I have no idea how they would do it but it would be similar to that. And eventually they’d go back for a little more.

Keep in mind that people are basically sheep and they will eventually do what Uncle Sam wants them to do. This isn’t the 1880’s and the men of today are quite a bit more docile than they used to be. Oh there are some who would resist and they would be made examples of.

[/quote]

ZEB, I’m not nearly as bold as you in terms of making predictions, but I think there is merit to Max’s statement. I suppose it has a lot to do with where one lives, but here in south Mississippi I believe “government” would have a very hard time getting the guns of our citizens. Consider it fanaticism if you like, but my peers around here would shoot back when/if those officers came to the door. I don’t think they would be terribly discouraged by the “examples” either.

Another point, there isn’t SUPPOSED to be a record of what guns we own. We have to pass a background check to purchase a firearm, but then those records are SUPPOSED to be destroyed. We have no “licensing” requirement for the firearms themselves. Open carry is legal here, so that doesn’t require any sort of registration either. The only registration we might be subject to is if we apply for concealed carry. So, the state of Mississippi knows that I am allowed to carry a concealed weapon, but they aren’t SUPPOSED to know if I actually own a weapon or what kind it may be.

1013

I know my statement sounds over the top, but I see this issue as non-negotiable with people, so much to the point that cops will not enforce it. We passed a law in 2013 to confiscate guns from felons and the mentally ill and it failed miserably when they tried to enforce it.

One could beg the question, even if you pass such a law to remove guns from a criminal or a crazy person and the government does not follow through, should the government be liable if they commit a crime with a gun ?

1014

[quote]Dr J wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.
[/quote]

I cannot disagree with you more my friend. The government is too smart to take everyone’s gun in one swoop. They chisel away at things to not arouse the people. For example, If the government decided that you could own one or two guns per person, but wanted the rest people would rationalize that away. Or they could keep their long guns but give up their hand guns etc. I have no idea how they would do it but it would be similar to that. And eventually they’d go back for a little more.

Keep in mind that people are basically sheep and they will eventually do what Uncle Sam wants them to do. This isn’t the 1880’s and the men of today are quite a bit more docile than they used to be. Oh there are some who would resist and they would be made examples of.

[/quote]

ZEB, I’m not nearly as bold as you in terms of making predictions, but I think there is merit to Max’s statement. I suppose it has a lot to do with where one lives, but here in south Mississippi I believe “government” would have a very hard time getting the guns of our citizens. Consider it fanaticism if you like, but my peers around here would shoot back when/if those officers came to the door. I don’t think they would be terribly discouraged by the “examples” either.

[/quote]

You overestimate the average persons desire to commit murder.

Agent: “We would like your gun sir”

Home Owner points the gun at the man shoots and kills him dead…nope not happening. I’m not saying that there wouldn’t be a few who would do that but the overwhelming majority of people are not going to do that. I don’t care where you live.

1015

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

But not because “gunz”. I do because it clearly shows a politician for who they are and how they think. It’s the most important litmus test I have right now…

[/quote]

You GET this. Most don’t.

If you’re in a discussion with anyone about this subject and the anyone utters the words “hunting” or “sportsman” or “reasonable,” or word of the day, “pragmatic,” or “safety measures” (which are always enforced at the point of a…gun) you pretty much know you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t get it.

[/quote]

Pretty much.

I would however, be willing to placate the emotional amongst the citizenry with things like “universal background checks” if we get some portion of our rights BACK that was previously taken.

I mean, that is the biggest issue with “compromise”. A lot of times, when people use that word they mean: “do what I want to some degree or another”. Not “hey I’ll give you this if you give me that”. Gun control specifically.

I live in a high regulation state, and it’s really fucking annoying to have my Democrat “betters” tell me how to live my life when I’ve never done anything to even suggest I’d be anything other than a model FREE citizen. [/quote]

Some moron councilman here is actually proposing a per bullet tax. There is no shortage of useless shitbags trying to one-up the stupidity.

[/quote]

The Ninth Circus just upheld microstamping.

You guys will be having your guns confiscated pretty soon if you dont’ get your shit together. [/quote]

They can come and get them, good luck going to someone’s house and collecting their gun.
[/quote]

What do you expect the gun owner to do? They have a record of that particular person owning a certain type of gun and they want it. There are two men in plane cloths both packing guns of their own.

Go ahead tell me what the gun owner is supposed to do other than surrender his weapon.[/quote]

The first incident of a gun being confiscated would be the last, and probably the beginning of a revolution that perhaps needs to be had. Ballot referendums and recalls would begin and the people would rise up in a way that would not favor Democrats. This would be the tipping point, most assuredly.
[/quote]

I cannot disagree with you more my friend. The government is too smart to take everyone’s gun in one swoop. They chisel away at things to not arouse the people. For example, If the government decided that you could own one or two guns per person, but wanted the rest people would rationalize that away. Or they could keep their long guns but give up their hand guns etc. I have no idea how they would do it but it would be similar to that. And eventually they’d go back for a little more.

Keep in mind that people are basically sheep and they will eventually do what Uncle Sam wants them to do. This isn’t the 1880’s and the men of today are quite a bit more docile than they used to be. Oh there are some who would resist and they would be made examples of.

[/quote]

For now they don’t even need to do this much and accomplish their goal. Gun ownership has been in decline just because of urban growth and the stigma of owning one. How many born this year will own one in 50 years even if there is no “gun ban”? I could shoot in my back yard growing up, I can’t now and its not because of any laws.
[/quote]

Gun ownership is not down according to this article.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-vespa/2013/03/11/what-decline-new-york-times-uses-poll-suggest-sharp-drop-gun-ownership

[/quote]

I also noticed they sometimes interchangeably use the word “gun owner” and “household gun ownership” which can be misleading. A record number of young adults are living with their parents so they would need to answer yes even if they don’t own one or never plan to own one.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/85c182d0976f44b0a54780b7df8633bb/major-survey-shows-gun-ownership-declining

1016

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

If he wins, it’s a guaranteed victory for the Republicans; provided that they elect someone… sensible, like Donald Trump.[/quote]

You are kidding right?
[/quote]

Nope!

At this point in time, I genuinely think Trump would be a better choice for president than just about any of the candidates currently in the race.

1017

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

If he wins, it’s a guaranteed victory for the Republicans; provided that they elect someone… sensible, like Donald Trump.[/quote]

You are kidding right?
[/quote]

Nope!

At this point in time, I genuinely think Trump would be a better choice for president than just about any of the candidates currently in the race.

[/quote]

There are a multitude of reasons why the republicans should not risk it with Trump. First of all there is no need to take a risk. Hillary is easily beatable with almost any one of the large group. Trump or Carson would be the biggest risk for loss. Everyone thinks because Trump built a large real estate empire that this has given him the skills to run for President. It has not. Running for President is a totally different game.

I’ve used sports analogies before, simply because one is a great football player does not mean he can play tennis at the highest level. Politics not unlike sports takes a particular set of skills that are independent to that specific game.

I honestly believe that in a presidential debate Hillary would make Trump look quite bad. She knows what to say when to say it how to say it and if it is worth saying…it’s her game. Trump on the other hand is liable to say anything, things that shouldn’t be said, or say them at the wrong time. He would also be going up against a polished team against Hillary. She has been through two winning Presidential elections with her husband and one losing one in 2008. Tons of experience. Why would you ever want to put someone who has never been through even a local election up against someone with such vast experience? Because you like him? Bad reason!

Don’t get me wrong people just might be sick enough of Hillary where someone with zilch for experience could beat her. But if that is the case I’d rather be it someone other than Trump. He is always just one comment away from destroying his campaign.

We can easily defeat Hillary this year with a multitude of different combinations of candidates. Why risk it with someone like Donald Trump and get four more years of left wing nonsense?

1018

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

If he wins, it’s a guaranteed victory for the Republicans; provided that they elect someone… sensible, like Donald Trump.[/quote]

You are kidding right?
[/quote]

Nope!

At this point in time, I genuinely think Trump would be a better choice for president than just about any of the candidates currently in the race.

[/quote]

I think more people are in line with your view than they are willing to admit publicly. When Carson declines, Trump is going to pick up those voters. We are seeing the Obama effect of 2008 right now with Trump, because no one cares about the other oatmeal candidates at the moment.

1019

Beans,

What rights would you like to see restored/given in exchange for a universal background check program?

1021

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]magick wrote:

If he wins, it’s a guaranteed victory for the Republicans; provided that they elect someone… sensible, like Donald Trump.[/quote]

You are kidding right?
[/quote]

Nope!

At this point in time, I genuinely think Trump would be a better choice for president than just about any of the candidates currently in the race.

[/quote]

I think more people are in line with your view than they are willing to admit publicly. When Carson declines, Trump is going to pick up those voters. We are seeing the Obama effect of 2008 right now with Trump, because no one cares about the other oatmeal candidates at the moment.
[/quote]

The problem (and I LOVE seeing “pundits” squirm…Left AND Right!)…is that Trump defies any previous metrics that may have worked. He says something “offensive”…his Polls go up. He is vague and defensive when pressed…his Polls go up…

I’ll say it again…I really think the man could have some secret, illegal Mexican male Lover…and his Polls would go up.

The New Year should prove to be very, VERY interesting on the GOP side.

Mufasa