• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

Habsy said:
With all due respect, seriously, there is no easy solution period. If you think it's as simple as outlawing guns then you're not being realistic. Stop comparing the US to any other country, it's just not the same where guns are concerned.

Nothing will get better until one side realizes you aren't getting the guns and the other realizes a great many people shouldn't have the guns. That's where the middle ground is.
Click to expand...
Are you an NRA member? And why are you lobbying them to take mental illness more seriously?
 
Aberdeen said:
Are you an NRA member? And why are you lobbying them to take mental illness more seriously?
Click to expand...

Because my family goes to church, festivals, concerts, school... in other words live. Enough is enough, too many wackos have access to guns. There's nothing wrong with requiring licensing and education to own weaponry. In fact, the licensing process should be more stringent the higher up the scale of gun you go. I have a class 3 gun license now. It took me over a year to get it. The requirements aren't as easy as people portray. I can purchase and sell automatic weapons and suppressors, along with other very nasty things if I chose to. My point is there are already laws in place for licensing of mass casualty firearms and weapons, simply extend things like extended clips etc to that license. It's not easy to get. My contention is that if you really are an enthusiast, you'll have no problem doing the legwork. I did.
 
Last edited:
leafman101 said:
I love how gun enthusiasts always bring up gun bans as if that is a proposal that has ever been tabled by people who support gun control. The reason why this issue is never adequately addressed is because the gun nuts refuse to even come to the table. Actually its more sinister than that, they donate billions of dollars to ensure that reasonable gun laws it can't be discussed.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely correct. Anecdotally speaking, every person I know that is into guns, goes to the ranges and takes it seriously has no issue with stricter requirements on the guns. The issue are the lazy people who want to shoot off their weapons in their backyard instead of a licensed facility. I mentioned before that this country needs an organization of responsible gun owners to challenge the NRA, which is really a front for the gun makers.

Don't think guys like me are happy when these incidents occur. We're not. What now? I should start carrying in church?
 
Habsy said:
Be genuine, it's not. Sports are. Of course you'll find many that think firing guns is a sport.
Click to expand...

As long as we are clear here...

The right to play with toys is more important to you than protecting the thousands of innocent people killed yearly in mass shootings.
 
Ya I buy that. You have to think responsible gun owners and hunters understand and appreciate the risk of guns. Hell the surveys show most Americans are in favour of reasonable gun control.

It's the wackos and manufacturers with the money that ruin it for everyone else. Like so may other things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Axios
@axios
Russian lawyer: Don Jr. said that if Trump won election, administration would review Magnitsky Act Russia sanction. axios.com/russian-lawyer…
 
leafman101 said:
Ya I buy that. You have to think responsible gun owners and hunters understand and appreciate the risk of guns. Hell the surveys show most Americans are in favour of reasonable gun control.

It's the wackos and manufacturers with the money that ruin it for everyone else. Like so may other things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If only the US had a billionaire president who didn't have to worry about giving in to special interests to just be able to do the right thing...
 
As a hunter, I am happy with what Trump said.

Considering his comments I assume he is going to advocate for a policy change that would allow for increased checks to take place before being allowed to purchase a weapon. He himself said this is a "mental health" issue. You gotta think that means stricter rules about mental capacities and illness are coming forward.

More great news is that I assume he will be advocating for more money to be invested into mental health research and services.

Good day for the United States.
 
Last edited:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/wo...estrictions/ydvplYA99XWpTlR7LIRiQI/story.html

MOSCOW — A Russian lawyer who met with President Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, said in a 2½-hour interview in Moscow that she would tell these and other things to the Senate Judiciary Committee on condition that her answers be made public, something it hasn’t agreed to. She has received scores of questions from the committee, which is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Veselnitskaya said she’s also ready — if asked — to testify to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Click to expand...
 
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/wo...estrictions/ydvplYA99XWpTlR7LIRiQI/story.html

MOSCOW — A Russian lawyer who met with President Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, said in a 2½-hour interview in Moscow that she would tell these and other things to the Senate Judiciary Committee on condition that her answers be made public, something it hasn’t agreed to. She has received scores of questions from the committee, which is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Veselnitskaya said she’s also ready — if asked — to testify to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Click to expand...
 
erica orden @eorden
5h
Replying to @eorden
WSJ analysis of 159,000 Kremlin-backed tweets shows they started right after Trump declared; backed him 10-to-1 wsj.com/articles/russi…
 
erica orden @eorden
5h
Replying to @eorden
WSJ analysis of 159,000 Kremlin-backed tweets shows they started right after Trump declared; backed him 10-to-1 wsj.com/articles/russi…
 
zeke said:
erica orden @eorden
5h
Replying to @eorden
WSJ analysis of 159,000 Kremlin-backed tweets shows they started right after Trump declared; backed him 10-to-1 wsj.com/articles/russi…
Click to expand...

Wow Russian tweets cost Hillary the election?

It wasn’t how she stole the nomination from Bernie, alienated all his supporters and ignored the rust belt?

Neat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top