Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,104

    Default

    The dems simply wish to make the possession of a firearm a federal felony. The enforcement and prosecution would be at the discretion of the Party. Absolute power is the goal. Regards, Clark

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Howard View Post
    The dems simply wish to make the possession of a firearm a federal felony. The enforcement and prosecution would be at the discretion of the Party. Absolute power is the goal. Regards, Clark
    That doesn't make sense.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Howard View Post
    The dems simply wish to make the possession of a firearm a federal felony. The enforcement and prosecution would be at the discretion of the Party. Absolute power is the goal. Regards, Clark
    True. But they will settle for forcing every gun owner, a la Obamacare, to have liability insurance which will be very broad in coverage so that every drug dealer shot by a business associate will be able to file a claim, most of which will go to the lawyers who as a group are a significant donor class to the CPUSA, I mean the DNC.

  4. Default

    Didn't "Ghost Gun" used to refer to "plastic guns" like Glocks because they couldn't detect them with metal detectors at airports?

    I think Liberals like to use scary words.
    Fred Pillot
    Captain
    San Jose Zouaves
    1876

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by togor View Post
    That doesn't make sense.
    Can't see why it wouldn't . anyone with any common sense can understand laws don't matter to the outlaw . There are some of the general population that is too dumb to grasp that , but there are a lot of them who do know that and realize that disarmament is a key step , especially if they can do it through legislation .
    togor , I just don't believe you are that naive , you just like to disagree ? Or pick brains and hear opinions ?
    Or stir doodoo ?
    Kenneth

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aintright View Post
    Can't see why it wouldn't . anyone with any common sense can understand laws don't matter to the outlaw . There are some of the general population that is too dumb to grasp that , but there are a lot of them who do know that and realize that disarmament is a key step , especially if they can do it through legislation .
    togor , I just don't believe you are that naive , you just like to disagree ? Or pick brains and hear opinions ?
    Or stir doodoo ?
    Kenneth
    Well let me amend my comment. Clark's comment frames things in terms of absolute power. I however subscribe to the more practical view that one can only push their power so far on the enemy before issues of logistics (being too far from your own base) and terrain (fighting on the enemy's turf) limit further advance. Think of it this way--the public in general supports some access to abortion, with some restrictions. Anyone who pushes for an absolute ban on abortions or unrestricted access to them runs into considerable difficulty conquering that last 15% of the opposition. So it would be with guns. The public generally supports the second amendment, but they also support greater restrictions than what are in effect today. At some point the needle is likely to move, possibly a great deal (considering where it is now), but will it swing all the way to where Clark predicts? I doubt it. Plus, if you read his comment literally, that law enforcement will take its cues directly from the political party, there is a burden of proof there that he cannot possibly meet.
    Last edited by togor; 11-21-2017 at 07:12.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •