Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The NRA's strength is invoking fear.
Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
No,no, fuck no. You people have a comprehension problem. Shall not be infringed is specific.Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
Assuming any participate.Participating LEOs lives would not be worth spit in any registration/confiscation scheme.
The NRA's strength is invoking fear.
No,no, fuck no. You people have a comprehension problem. Shall not be infringed is specific.Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
The NRA's strength is invoking fear.
Fear is about all I've heard from some of these presidential candidates. The politics of fear only seem to bother you when those you don't like engage in it.
No,no, fuck no. You people have a comprehension problem. Shall not be infringed is specific.Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
So is Well-Regulated.
Damn sure not going to want you to do it.National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
Good luck with that
You're right, will never happen as long as we allow the NRA to dictate our gun legislation.
The NRA's strength is invoking fear.
Fear is about all I've heard from some of these presidential candidates. The politics of fear only seem to bother you when those you don't like engage in it.
As usual, you're wrong. But you're consistent, I'll give you that. I can see why they made you a moderator.
No,no, fuck no. You people have a comprehension problem. Shall not be infringed is specific.Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
So is Well-Regulated.
The SCOTUS has reiterated that "well regulated" as defined at the time of writing in no way impacts the individual right.
Damn sure not going to want you to do it.National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
Good luck with that
You're right, will never happen as long as we allow the NRA to dictate our gun legislation.
The NRA's strength is invoking fear.
Fear is about all I've heard from some of these presidential candidates. The politics of fear only seem to bother you when those you don't like engage in it.
As usual, you're wrong. But you're consistent, I'll give you that. I can see why they made you a moderator.
I'm rarely wrong because I'm a fairly rational and logical individual.
The NRA is nothing more than an advocacy group for people with similar interests. It's easier for one national organization to pull together folks from all walks of life who want to protect their Constitutional rights than it is for people to do individually. They are no different than the UAW or Teamsters advocating for union members or Emily's List or the League of Women Voters or the NEA. Gun grabbers rail against the NRA having the influence they do, but never say a word about these other groups and some actively support them.
She knows. She's trolling you.The SCOTUS has reiterated that "well regulated" as defined at the time of writing in no way impacts the individual right.
The SCOTUS has reiterated that "well regulated" as defined at the time of writing in no way impacts the individual right.
Right, So which militia are you a part of?
The NRA is nothing more than an advocacy group for people with similar interests. It's easier for one national organization to pull together folks from all walks of life who want to protect their Constitutional rights than it is for people to do individually. They are no different than the UAW or Teamsters advocating for union members or Emily's List or the League of Women Voters or the NEA. Gun grabbers rail against the NRA having the influence they do, but never say a word about these other groups and some actively support them.
Hahaha, thanks for the laugh.
Just because you're less partisan than the plethora of white supremacists that reside on this site, doesn't make you rational.
No,no, fuck no. You people have a comprehension problem. Shall not be infringed is specific.Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
So is Well-Regulated.
Beto Admits Non-Compliant AR-15 Owners Would Receive a 'Visit From a Law enforcement Officer' Under His Plan | National Review“What’s the next step for the federal government there?” Joe Scarborough asked O’Rourke on MSNBC, giving the example of a “rancher in Texas” who refuses to give up his AR-15.
“I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused there have to be consequences or else there is no respect for the law,” O’Rourke responded. “So in that case I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and make sure that it is purchased, bought back, so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.”
First, let's dismiss the idea that anti-gun loons in general disagree with Beto about banning and confiscating 'assault weapons' - if you support banning 'assault weapons' but not confiscating them you support a restriction on the rights of the law abiding for no purpose whatever, as criminals and mass shooter will still have access to 'assault weapons' currently in private hahands.
So, obvious questions to the 'ban assault weapons' crowd:
- How do you know who has an 'assault weapon'?
- How do you know someone did not sell back their 'assault weapon'
- How do you know which houses to send law enforcement?
- How many FBI / ATF agents do you think will be necessary to force compliance with the ban?
- How many FBI / ATF agents are you willing to sacrifice t force compliance with the ban?
National Registry/mandatory insurance with heavy fines/prison time for those caught out of compliance. Not an overnight fix but will certainly weed out most in the years to come.
