doniston
Aint I a cutie? HEH HEH
I don't know, but someone asked what they did the same. I was just giving an example.
Rudy The Next President
- Thread starter AnglScarlett
- Start date
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
"I guess you have never heard of the assault weapons ban, passed under Bill Clinton and then signed by him, in between visits from Monica?"
OMGZ let's all run to the hills their going to take our assault rifles! Those were so practical in civilian affairs!
"The ban that was allowed to expire under George W Bush, who, is understanding of the relationship between a man and his assault rifle,"
Is this the same as the understanding between a loon and his blow up doll wife?
"not least because he is not distracted by chubby interns in the oval office?"
Who cares?
"The ban that, when the sneaky Democrats bring up again, and try to get passed, with the help of a lot of whiny cops who will claim they are all for it, Don Veto Rudy Gulliani will strike down with his pen?"
Don't care. The assault rifle ban didn't even "take your guns" (OMGZ SO SCARY! IT'S LIKE 19841!). It just banned the sale of them.\
"How stupit are you?"
I'm not stupit at all, thankyou. But you're a fucking idiot.
"Is there even a lefty on this site worthy of me, I have been cyber-skewering them left and right here, and of course, I am always right? Touche."
Please, don't try to compare our intelligences, the comparison isn't favorable towards you. It would be rather insulting, like picking on a retarded kid, for me to even touch this subject.
OMGZ let's all run to the hills their going to take our assault rifles! Those were so practical in civilian affairs!
"The ban that was allowed to expire under George W Bush, who, is understanding of the relationship between a man and his assault rifle,"
Is this the same as the understanding between a loon and his blow up doll wife?
"not least because he is not distracted by chubby interns in the oval office?"
Who cares?
"The ban that, when the sneaky Democrats bring up again, and try to get passed, with the help of a lot of whiny cops who will claim they are all for it, Don Veto Rudy Gulliani will strike down with his pen?"
Don't care. The assault rifle ban didn't even "take your guns" (OMGZ SO SCARY! IT'S LIKE 19841!). It just banned the sale of them.\
"How stupit are you?"
I'm not stupit at all, thankyou. But you're a fucking idiot.
"Is there even a lefty on this site worthy of me, I have been cyber-skewering them left and right here, and of course, I am always right? Touche."
Please, don't try to compare our intelligences, the comparison isn't favorable towards you. It would be rather insulting, like picking on a retarded kid, for me to even touch this subject.
Last edited:
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
How did Bush "let it expire"? He couldn't do anything about it, if that's what you're talking about. Which means he had just about as much influence in the affair as I did.. You're an idiot in government affairs, also. Surprising.
So Bush is anti-gun?
Sarah Brady, what a turncoat huh? It's amazing how having your husband turned into a vegetable will change a woman. Oh well, her 15 minutes are up, LOL!
Right. It isn't like they can appoint people to the SCOTUS willing to "interpret" it differently than that or anything. Just as voting R for President couldn't possibly change the fact that the SCOTUS previously ruled that people had a right to an abortion before the third trimester. Right?
That's total fear-mongering. I can't envision a scenario where one President would make that the #1 issue when appointing justices, and would be able to keep it secret enough to fool enough members of Congress into approving the appointment, and could do it enough times that there would be enough "anti gun" justices on the court to re-interpret the 2nd amendment in a way that would allow a ban on guns that are reasonable for hunting & self-defense.
Abortion isn't in the Bill of Rights; the right to own a gun is. It's completely unrealistic to think that any President would have the ability to "take away my guns!"
Right, and I can't think of a President who would make it their number 1 to appoint judges that are anti-abortion and "shrewd" enough to not answer the question using the Bader-Ginsburg reasoning of not "ruling" before hearing the case.
Your argument is weak.
Frankly, it's ridiculous to compare the anti-abortion & gun control movements. YES, there are people who want to ban guns, but they are a small minority of the gun control movement. The anti-abortion movement EXPECTS their nominee to follow through with the ultimate goal of overturning Roe v. Wade, and are very open about that, and exert a great deal of influence over Republican candidates in general (witness Rudy & Romney's turnabout in this election cycle).
The 'ban gun' movement is considered a fringe of the overall gun control movement, and exerts little influence, if any, over presumptive Democratic nominees. The idea that a President Hillary Clinton would make some sort of stealth SCOTUS campaign to redefine the 2nd amendment is ignorant, and shows no understanding at all of who she is. She would never jeopardize her power or position in that way; she's way too expedient.
No realistic canididate for President is ever going to make any move to "ban guns," lest they want to put the Democrat's in a permanent minority. Dems in Congress realize that as well, and would not allow this to transpire. It is a fabricated, overblown fear....
I largely agree, I wouldn't vote for President on the one issue alone. But it doesn't change that Presidents can very well effect our Constitutional freedoms through appointments and other means. To pretend otherwise and call it "fearmongering" is pretty much ludicrous. If they do not have the same "interpretation" as others, it is likely they will seek appointments that agree with them.
The idea that we shouldn't pay attention to that only because it is written in the constitution is also ludicrous. Crap, we now have a D congress voting huge powers to the President to listen to your international calls without a warrant.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I agree. To me, the most important issues when electing a President are economic policy and defense. If candidates are close on those, then begin to break down differences on the social issues.
/MSG/
Uwaa OmO
The idea of voting based soley on a constitutional right is absurd? If an elected offical so callously violates one right, how do I know he will not do the same for others? And even if he doesn't precedent is established for others who may not be so ethical or consciencous. Thats why a political canidates stance on guns is of importance to me. Not that people who favor guns dont favor OTHER curtails on our civil liberties (like the war on drugs), but I do my best to be an informed voter.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
The 14th, 13th, 15th, 21st, and 25th ammendments abolished several state rights.