Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
Insane Proposal of the Day 4/2/18 >

Insane Proposal of the Day 4/2/18

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Insane Proposal of the Day 4/2/18

Old 04-02-2018, 04:35 PM
  #1  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
JagMagMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Port Neches, Texas
Posts: 5,514
Default Insane Proposal of the Day 4/2/18

It seems that the dummycrap, liberal insanity gets worse by the day!
Today's insane proposal comes from Debbie Wasserman Shultz, D. Florida. She proposes national background checks, NOT, on illegal aliens, tanks, or even fully automatic weapons! Oh no folks! It's better than that! She wants: a national background check for all ammunition purchases!
With prior warnings, the FED's can't catch one, punk, murderer, before he shoots up a school! It just shows that these crazy socialist's want to get rid of guns and Conservatives PERIOD!
JagMagMan is offline  
Old 04-02-2018, 05:08 PM
  #2  
Dominant Buck
 
Fieldmouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 36,196
Default

Yep, been dealing with several regarding scary weapons. It amazes me how stupid the liberals really are. They say shotguns are ok but that AR needs to go. I just shake my head.
Fieldmouse is online now  
Old 04-02-2018, 05:22 PM
  #3  
Nontypical Buck
 
sconnyhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wherever liberalism must be eradicated.
Posts: 2,596
Default

She's a Dem, what did you expect. She is trying to peddle the California play book, to the national scene.
sconnyhunter is offline  
Old 04-02-2018, 06:17 PM
  #4  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
JagMagMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Port Neches, Texas
Posts: 5,514
Default

Originally Posted by sconnyhunter View Post
She's a Dem, what did you expect. She is trying to peddle the California play book, to the national scene.
Well yeah, most of us already know that!
Crazy? YES!
Dangerous to America? HELL YES!

JagMagMan is offline  
Old 04-03-2018, 05:43 AM
  #5  
Nontypical Buck
 
sconnyhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wherever liberalism must be eradicated.
Posts: 2,596
Default

During previous generations. People like DWS, would have been secured in a helpful situation, preferably behind a locked door.

Now, we elect them to office and put their crazy on display. To infect the rest of us.
sconnyhunter is offline  
Old 04-03-2018, 07:11 AM
  #6  
Giant Nontypical
 
flags's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: CO Born but working in Amarillo, TX for now.
Posts: 7,854
Default

DWS (Dances With Stupid) can always be counted on to show ignorance and idiocy.
flags is offline  
Old 04-03-2018, 08:23 AM
  #7  
Super Moderator
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 16,998
Default

She dug herself a hole and is trying to dig her way back out. Still crazy though. Interestingly, like John Paul Stevens, she is giving the Dems' game plan away. She simply doesn't get the fact that different people in that huge political middle of the country have different breaking points where they think government intrusion is too much and that the far left is still a minority.
CalHunter is offline  
Old 04-03-2018, 09:33 AM
  #8  
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
 
JagMagMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Port Neches, Texas
Posts: 5,514
Default

Originally Posted by CalHunter View Post
She dug herself a hole and is trying to dig her way back out. Still crazy though. Interestingly, like John Paul Stevens, she is giving the Dems' game plan away. She simply doesn't get the fact that different people in that huge political middle of the country have different breaking points where they think government intrusion is too much and that the far left is still a minority.
I agree Cal, the dummies used to keep their agenda quiet except to their elite circle. I believe it was the senile old bag, Pelosi that once told them to shut up and don't mention guns around election time! Thanks to their own narcissistic stupidity, we all know for sure what they really want! Shame on us if we let them sneak up on us again!
JagMagMan is offline  
Old 04-03-2018, 12:47 PM
  #9  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 5,781
Default

I find this initiative more scary than others responding to this thread seem to. Whether this specific initiative gains traction or not is kind of beyond the point. Shultz articulated her strategy very succinctly. She said the second amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't protect the rights to keep bullets or cartridges. I think that is potentially a solid argument. Thus, it seems arguable to me that private ownership of cartridges, bullets, cartridge cases, and powder could be outlawed without running afoul of the second amendment.


Can some attorney who visits this site comment on this? Am I full of crap and the second amendment arguably DOES extend to these necessary accoutrements to arms?
Alsatian is online now  
Old 04-03-2018, 01:21 PM
  #10  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 773
Default

I'm no lawyer Alsatian but your question is answered easily enough. Ammunition is absolutely covered in the second amendment. A firearm or in the words of the second, arms, are nothing but a club without ammunition. Even back then arms included ammunition in the form of powder and ball. But unless the government grows a brain, or the public does so, they won't make that simple connection. Libs know full well that a firearm is nothing without ammo, even they aren't as clueless as that about firearms. They are just trying to find that loophole that is within all laws. The problem for them is, the second is one of those laws/rights written without any loopholes. Loopholes have been translated into it by SCOTUS that absolutely are not there. It is one of the, if not the only one of the amendments, that there truly is no arguing with. It was specific with no lawyer speak in it. Shall not be infringed can not be translated in any way whatsoever other that what it plainly states yet so many try to on a daily basis. Many try to say that it was written so long ago and the authors could not have imagined the types of firearms we have today. Those people must have thought the authors were stupid. Firearm technology had grown leaps and bounds in their own lifetime. They could have easily envisioned what we have today. They probably envisioned even more advancements than we have.
hunters_life is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.