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.
How un-American is this? This is another example why the founders wanted a president to be a natural born Citizen born within the United States boundries to two U.S. citizen parents to ensure sole allegiance to the United States and the Constitution provided to us by our patriotic founders. This example proves the putative president doesn't respect the Constitution or our citizens rights, especially the 2nd amendment. We need to elect constitutionally qualified people who are loyal to USA and who respect our constitution , history, culture, and values. Due to the putative presidents upbringing away from American soil, it alienated him from what it is to be an American, the exceptionalism and freedoms that go along with it. Anyway, this is a complete waste of taxpayers money used to infringe on our rights the founders provided for us.
I don't mind gun control attempts everybody entitled to an opinion but doing it with tax payer funds under the guise of licensing no way
The true intent of gun control is to disarm homeowners
But why?
"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are "natural born Citizens" for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."
"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are "natural born Citizens" for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."
- ankeny v daniels
A 3 panel opinion by corrupt judges covering for Obama doesn't make it precedent. Stay on topic about the putative president asking 1.1 billion for gun control which infringes our 2nd Amendment rights. What is your opinion of this latest move by him? Do you agree this is a waste of taxpayers money?
Some have misinterpreted the fact sheet to mean a proposed $1.1 billion dollar increase in this type of spending, or an enormous increase from $382.1 million in funds requested in a FY 2014 DOJ "gun safety" fact sheet. These two numbers from the different fact sheets should not be conflated, however, as the $1.1 billion requested for FY 2015 is for the total funding for programs that the DOJ considers part of its "gun safety" efforts, while the $382.1 million in funding listed in the FY 2014 fact sheet is for proposed increases for that year. And while the $1.1 billion in proposed funding for FY 2015 certainly contains some regrettable spending, the vast majority of that total is to maintain current federal programs that enforce current federal gun laws, some of which need not alarm law-abiding gun owners.
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.
