Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Biden just now: "executive orders and executive action can be taken" to enact gun control

205 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

[quote name='pstall' timestamp='1357829509' post='2087904']
i guess the thing that troubles me is usually those that lean left, seem to have this very odd or almost naive trust of govt. and they don't even mind if the govt is hypocritical or condescending. they just trust them.

i don't mind smarter more common sense gun laws. but thats as far as it needs to go.
[/quote]
I guess the thing that troubles me is usually those that lean right, seem to have this very odd or almost naïve trust of Corporate America, and they don't even mind if Corporate America is hypocritical or condescending. They just trust them.

"[i]I don't mind smarter more common sense gun laws. but that's as far as it needs to go[/i]." I have yet to read anything which would lead me to believe our federal government intends to do anything other than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[url="http://www.hulu.com/watch/443675"]http://www.hulu.com/watch/443675[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Most unconstitutional president ever.


Ill happily give them my bullets :) if they try to take my guns.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

^ "law-abiding gun-owner" I presume

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='NanuqoftheNorth' timestamp='1357847214' post='2088417']
I guess the thing that troubles me is usually those that lean right, seem to have this very odd or almost naïve trust of Corporate America, and they don't even mind if Corporate America is hypocritical or condescending. They just trust them.

"[i]I don't mind smarter more common sense gun laws. but that's as far as it needs to go[/i]." I have yet to read anything which would lead me to believe our federal government intends to do anything other than that.
[/quote]

i can take my business elsewhere much easier than i can taxes. also. big corps don't have this neat little luxury called printing money.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='Sheikh Zula' timestamp='1357855971' post='2088681']
^ "law-abiding gun-owner" I presume
[/quote]

Yes, I am a responsible gun owner.

CC permit holder and avid supporter of having a gun safe.

Lawful owership of firarms is an undeniable right since the founding of our once great nation, if one man thinks he can deny that I have a feeling there will be a great deal of people who see it the way I do.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

why do people think that [i]if[/i] they pass an executive order that it would be wide ranging, or that it won't get challenged and thrown out.

And guess what, if it doesn't get thrown out in court, then by definition it's constitutional regardless of whether or not you agree with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Firearm deaths are the second leading non-natural forms of death in the US for children.

Cause everybody's a responsible gun owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

^^^that's fine. you're just not one of the law-abiding citizens that people refer to when the "Gun control only affects law-abiding gun ownerz!" argument comes up.

you would be a criminal in other words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Laws don't apply to ME cause I'M a good person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='Sheikh Zula' timestamp='1357858453' post='2088740']
^^^that's fine. you're just not one of the law-abiding citizens that people refer to when the "Gun control only affects law-abiding gun ownerz!" argument comes up.

you would be a criminal in other words.
[/quote]

The right to bear arms exists for this very reason.... (a corrupt goverment trying to violate our constitutional rights)

Anyone care to take a look at history and see what happens when leaders disarm the people?
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='pstall' timestamp='1357856602' post='2088691']
i can take my business elsewhere much easier than i can taxes. also. big corps don't have this neat little luxury called printing money.
[/quote] The only allegiance most corporations have in a plutocracy is to their share holders. Big Business has an enormous influence on our political representatives. Bailouts with out accountability, continued exclusive rights to virtually free money via the fed for only the largest financial institutions. Billions in annual subsidies to the most profitable industry the world had ever know, big oil. The bloated MIC? These are just a few Corporate sectors receiving all the benefits of being able to print money without the aggravation of having to actually print it. The only thing preventing Corporate America from completely taking this country back to the age of the "Robber Barons" is an American's right to vote. [b]Citigroup Plutonomy Report Part 2 [/b]Mar 5 2006
[indent=1]
RISKS -- WHAT COULD GO WRONG?
[b]Our whole plutonomy thesis is based on the idea that the rich will keep getting richer[/b]. [i]This thesis is not without its risks[/i]. For example, [b]a policy error[/b] leading to asset deflation, would likely damage plutonomy. Furthermore, the [b]rising wealth gap[/b] between the rich and poor will [b]probably at some point lead to a political backlash.[/b] Whilst the rich are getting a greater share of the wealth, and the poor a lesser share, [i]political enfrachisement remains as was[/i] -- [b]one person, one vote[/b] (in the plutonomies). At some point it is likely that labor will fight back against the rising profit share of the rich and there will be [b]a political backlash[/b] against the rising wealth of the rich. This could be felt [b]through higher taxation on the rich[/b] (or [i]indirectly[/i] though higher [b]corporate taxes/regulation[/b]) or through trying to [b]protect indigenous[/b] [home-grown] [b]laborers[/b], in a push-back on globalization -- either [i]anti-mmigration, or protectionism[/i]. [b]We don’t see this happening yet, though there are signs of rising political tensions[/b]. However [i]we are[/i] keeping a close eye on developments.[/indent]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites