Harris Promises to TRAMPLE 2nd+4th Amendment Rights, Violate

[IvanTheTerribleShot]

Tom Grieve of USCCA professionally meditates on 10-second quote from Ms. Harris campaign.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLST0ppOKEc

Ranb, do you still insist Harris will be a lesser gun grabber?

[xd ED]

~~~~~~

Ranb, do you still insist Harris will be a lesser gun grabber?

Yeah...But ORANGE MAN BAD!...ORANGE MAN BAD!...

[Sorcerer]

Harris is the female wizard of OZ. Don’t look behind the curtain.

[Jackpine Savage]

TDS for sure.

This might help for some, but in RanB's case I'm sure it is terminal.

[Lumpy]

Ranb, do you still insist Harris will be a lesser gun grabber?

He didn't claim that; he claimed that we need to boycott the Republicans and specifically Trump, which will make the 'Pubs uphold gun rights as a fundamental plank of the GOP platform.

Yeah right.

[Ranb]

Ranb, do you still insist Harris will be a lesser gun grabber?

Harris has stated that she wants her own firearm restrictions. But unless she is willing to do as Trump, Biden and Bush did, she will need to reply on Congress to pass a bill that she will then sign. Harris is not the proven gun grabber that Trump is, yet. She has not claimed to want gun confiscation without due process. Time will tell. I'm not clairvoyant.

Trump is the proven gun grabber. He is not satisfied with the half million he has taken so far; he wants more.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4716589/ ... ess-second
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... -27763.pdf
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/t ... re-weapons

[Jackpine Savage]

Trump is the proven gun grabber. He is not satisfied with the half million he has taken so far; he wants more.

You sound like the ATF, a bump stock is NOT a firearm.

[Ranb]

You sound like the ATF, a bump stock is NOT a firearm.

Trump said it was a firearm. Why are you the one who decides what a firearm is, and not the federal government?

How was Trump able to accomplish banning them without classifying them as firearms?

[Jackpine Savage]

You sound like the ATF, a bump stock is NOT a firearm.

Trump said it was a firearm. Why are you the one who decides what a firearm is, and not the federal government?

How was Trump able to accomplish banning them without classifying them as firearms?

But you are smarter than that, right? Or just willing to lie to manipulate opinion?

He wasn't able to, the Supreme Court prevented it.

[Ranb]

You sound like the ATF, a bump stock is NOT a firearm.

Trump said it was a firearm. Why are you the one who decides what a firearm is, and not the federal government?
How was Trump able to accomplish banning them without classifying them as firearms?

But you are smarter than that, right? Or just willing to lie to manipulate opinion?

He wasn't able to, the Supreme Court prevented it.

You know full well that bump stocks were banned from 2019 to 2024. Are you also pretending that the ban did not happen because the court eventually reversed it? What lie did I tell?

Pretending to be so stupid as to not understand how the law works, is not a good look on this forum. So how was Trump able to grab the bump stocks? Is evasion and willful ignorance the best you can be here?

Why are you the one who decides what a firearm is, and not the federal government?

[Jackpine Savage]

Blah, blah, blah. Have you noticed that you repeat yourself a lot?

A saying comes to mind, "can't see the forest for the trees".

[Ranb]

Blah, blah, blah. Have you noticed that you repeat yourself a lot?

A saying comes to mind, "can't see the forest for the trees".

What lie did I tell?

I repeat myself because people like you are evasive. What do you have to lose by answering a simple question?

You seem to have little understanding about how gun control laws work in the USA, but think you're good enough to lecture the rest of us about how a firearm is defined. Your claim that bump stocks were not firearms is very stupid. It is bad enough that you say stupid things, but you seem to think that the rest of us are stupid enough to believe your crap.

Blah blah blah is the most intelligent thing you have had to say in this thread so far.

[Sorcerer]

Here in lays the issue with Executive Orders. Most presidents have not been lawyers. Executive orders are at the whim of the presenter. This is also an issue that pertains to states Governors EO. Little to no oversight. In Minnesota with the Democratic trifecta we are headed towards a dictatorship. EOs need to be heavily restricted or better yet outlawed. Going around/ past the legislature is nullification of our vote. Think of the resources wasted by Biden, lawyers on both sides, multiple courts appeals.

[xd ED]

Here in lays the issue with Executive Orders. Most presidents have not been lawyers. Executive orders are at the whim of the presenter. This is also an issue that pertains to states Governors EO. Little to no oversight. In Minnesota with the Democratic trifecta we are headed towards a dictatorship. EOs need to be heavily restricted or better yet outlawed. Going around/ past the legislature is nullification of our vote. Think of the resources wasted by Biden, lawyers on both sides, multiple courts appeals.

The original intent of Presidential Executive Orders was to allow the President the ability to manage the federal gov't without the need for an act of congress.
President Reagan ending the Professional Air-Traffic Controllers Association (PATCO) strike is an example of the original intent of a Presidential Executive Order.
Some of the more notable Presidential Executive Orders include:

The Emancipation Proclamation (1863)
Funding for the Manhattan Project (1941)
Desegregation of the U.S. Military (1948)
Affirmative Action in Government Contracting (1965)

They were never intended to sidestep the legislative process, or nullify existing law.
MN Governor Walz's behavior during Covid (and beyond) is a classic example of all that is wrong with the current take on executive orders.

[Jackpine Savage]

Blah, blah, blah. Have you noticed that you repeat yourself a lot?

A saying comes to mind, "can't see the forest for the trees".

What lie did I tell?

I repeat myself because people like you are evasive. What do you have to lose by answering a simple question?

You seem to have little understanding about how gun control laws work in the USA, but think you're good enough to lecture the rest of us about how a firearm is defined. Your claim that bump stocks were not firearms is very stupid. It is bad enough that you say stupid things, but you seem to think that the rest of us are stupid enough to believe your crap.

Blah blah blah is the most intelligent thing you have had to say in this thread so far.

How a firearm is defined is being decided right now amongst the Supremes in Garland vs. VanDerStok. We'll find out next spring I think.

You have a myopic hatred of Trump. You remind me of someone I know that has Asperger's. They are very intelligent. They grab on to an idea and pursue it like a dog with a bone, to the detriment of the rest of their daily life. They see everything in black and white, which at times is admirable, but makes it difficult for them to live in the real world. You are a gun guy, I don't want to be your enemy. I'm done arguing with you.