easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,190
- 2,645
"Gorsuch sided with liberal justices in a 5-4 decision in United States v. Davis, for which he wrote the opinion of the court. The law in question calls for longer sentences when a person uses a firearm in connection with a "crime of violence," which is defined as a felony "that by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense." That definition is rather confusing, Gorsuch said."
1. Dems are / were against tougher / longer sentences for committing crimes with weapons - guns.....despite their overall goal of getting rid of everyone's right to own a gun?
-- That kinda goes along with the fact that liberals actually HATE enforcing existing laws. They usually push for new laws instead of mandating the existing ones be enforced. This is just a continuous jog / run / push towards their overall final demand of outlawing all guns....
2. "Crime of Violence: 'That by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense" is confusing?
I think we have to blame this one on several things:
A. The DUMBING DOWN OF AMERICA through the continuous intentional decline of the public (and college) school system to churn out more and more ignorant Americans who can be easily manipulated, indoctrinated, and funneled into the Liberal policy of 'Economic Slavery' (dependency on hand-outs and Democrats who provide them = 'votes') they intend to being back if they win back power in 2020.
B. 'LAWYER SPEAK'. In the original bill all the lawyers politicians had to say was: 'IF YOU USE A GUN IN A CRIME, THE POSSIBILITY THAT SOMEONE WILL GET SHOT GOES WAY UP FROM ' ZERO' - COMMITTING A CRIME WITHOUT ONE...SO, IF YOU COMMIT A CRIME WITH A GUN YOU GET AN AUTOMATIC INCREASE IN PUNISHMENT / PRISON! TIME! NO EXCEPTIONS.'
Gorsuch sides with liberals in shooting down tougher sentences for gun crimes
-- Even Hillary would not be too stupid to NOT know she was breaking the law if she did so with a gun under this 'definition;. .
1. Dems are / were against tougher / longer sentences for committing crimes with weapons - guns.....despite their overall goal of getting rid of everyone's right to own a gun?
-- That kinda goes along with the fact that liberals actually HATE enforcing existing laws. They usually push for new laws instead of mandating the existing ones be enforced. This is just a continuous jog / run / push towards their overall final demand of outlawing all guns....
2. "Crime of Violence: 'That by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense" is confusing?
I think we have to blame this one on several things:
A. The DUMBING DOWN OF AMERICA through the continuous intentional decline of the public (and college) school system to churn out more and more ignorant Americans who can be easily manipulated, indoctrinated, and funneled into the Liberal policy of 'Economic Slavery' (dependency on hand-outs and Democrats who provide them = 'votes') they intend to being back if they win back power in 2020.
B. 'LAWYER SPEAK'. In the original bill all the lawyers politicians had to say was: 'IF YOU USE A GUN IN A CRIME, THE POSSIBILITY THAT SOMEONE WILL GET SHOT GOES WAY UP FROM ' ZERO' - COMMITTING A CRIME WITHOUT ONE...SO, IF YOU COMMIT A CRIME WITH A GUN YOU GET AN AUTOMATIC INCREASE IN PUNISHMENT / PRISON! TIME! NO EXCEPTIONS.'
Gorsuch sides with liberals in shooting down tougher sentences for gun crimes
-- Even Hillary would not be too stupid to NOT know she was breaking the law if she did so with a gun under this 'definition;. .