Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Note to self: don't argue with ANYBODY about guns.
You can argue with us about guns, just don't expect your arguments, your logic, and your reason to go unchallenged. If you don't want to be challenged, then you are probably right, you should not put forth arguments about guns.
How else can we discover whether our convictions and beliefs are correct if we don't subject them to the scrutiny of others?
You can argue with us about guns, just don't expect your arguments, your logic, and your reason to go unchallenged. If you don't want to be challenged, then you are probably right, you should not put forth arguments about guns.
How else can we discover whether our convictions and beliefs are correct if we don't subject them to the scrutiny of others?
well, you quoted me remember?
I said I am sorry you disagree with me. What else do you want me to do? agree with you? No, I won't
Us? seriously? lol Don't know you belong to the YOU vs ALL OF US crowd. lol but it is okay.
I said I am sorry you disagree with me. What else do you want me to do? agree with you? No, I won't
No, I don't expect you to agree with me, I am just pointing out what I see as the flaws and frankly, the danger in your logic. If you, and others reading this thread, consider my points and still believe your arguments are right, fine.
Damn, cant people just say "I disagree with the man but he is right on this" instead of the stupid partisan politics. Plenty of people supporting Trump over Clinton have always thought people on no fly list should be banned from buying guns. I also think if you are under investigation or ever have been under investigation for terrorist activities (of any nature) and not totally cleared (just closed due to insufficient evidence) you should be banned. Both sides of the coin are to blame on this. Many people on the left believe that would violate privacy laws and infringe on innocent until proven guilty....
Because there are people on this site who have changed opinions simply because the politician they support now supports something.
It actually shows that the (D) or (R) beside someone's name matters more than the policy.
They can remain in jail until their trial OR they can be released with the condition they must wear an ankle bracelet.
Their choice.
So either way someone innocent as not yet proven guilty is being stripped of their rights for the safety of others until it is determined their guilt. Same thing here. Maybe we need to have stricter guidelines on who goes on the watchlist.
I'm not against watch lists, per say, but I don't support lists as a usurp against due process. I said I'd wait until Trump's VP announcement, but it looks like I increasingly cannot support Trump. All I really want for Christmas is to repeal the health-care mandate anyway, and I can still get that through Gary Johnson and preserve some sense of integrity by note voting for either of the two clowns at the top of the two tickets.
No, I don't expect you to agree with me, I am just pointing out what I see as the flaws and frankly, the danger in your logic. If you, and others reading this thread, consider my points and still believe your arguments are right, fine.
well, I (one person, me myself and I) disagree with you.
I always wanted to be a FBI Profiler.
criminal profiling is based on science, behavior PATTERN. It definitely works if used properly. Is it perfect? NO. Maybe I am biased, but I hope people look up the term " behavioral profiling", I suspect FBI uses many different techniques, to determine if a person should belong to the "watch list".
Why does the US need the approval of lobbyists to create a law? Thought this was the 'change' all those Trump supporters want. So he goes to get permission of the gun lobby for Congress to act? How disgusting.
Despite saying he won't be beholden to anyone because of money, he sure ran quick over there when he had an excuse to. This is a common-sense thing to do, but has been a no-go in the congress for years, because... why? Will trump lose a lot of republican voters over this 'assault' on gun rights?
He's not asking permission. He is making an effort to get the most powerful gun lobby voice behind this idea. When was the last time a Dim pol tried to enlist the NRA to support legislation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777
Why does the US need the approval of lobbyists to create a law? Thought this was the 'change' all those Trump supporters want. So he goes to get permission of the gun lobby for Congress to act? How disgusting.
Because there are people on this site who have changed opinions simply because the politician they support now supports something.
It actually shows that the (D) or (R) beside someone's name matters more than the policy.
I have always been a republican and always supported stricter gun laws. I have also always been pro choice and marriage equality. Not everything is black and white.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
