The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,380
    113
    Upstate SC
    I know this is a gun forum and what I'm about to say is akin to heresy but guns aren't the only thing. There are other important things as well.

    That is true, there are other things, but Hillary would have appointed a justice to overturn Heller and MacDonald, and liberal federal judges would have fast-tracked cases to do just that. That would not be "nibbling around the edges" of a right and far from "sensible gun control"... it would be denying that the Second Amendment is an individual right... only a National Guard armory right.
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,380
    113
    Upstate SC
    Sorry, but I see free speech being more important. You wouldn't have it if you weren't capable of defending it, but somehow I see free speech much more dear.

    And we would have lost First Amendment rights under Hillary as well. The SCOTUS justice she would have appointed would have overturned Citizens United, which both Obama and Hillary opposed. For all of the rhetoric, please remember that Citizens United was about the government banning an anti-Hillary MOVIE!!! The First Amendment (barely) won, Obama and Hillary lost.
     

    indiucky

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    For all of the rhetoric, please remember that Citizens United was about the government banning an anti-Hillary MOVIE!!! The First Amendment (barely) won, Obama and Hillary lost.

    Lot's of folks don't realize that....It ran just once and IIRC one of the Wahlburg's was in it....
    Neat documentary on the back story...

    From IMDb..

    "There's more to the story of the Clintons and 9/11. Over two nights -- September 10-11, 2006, just four months before Hillary announced the exploratory committee for her original presidential campaign, ABC aired The Path to 9/11, a riveting and factual docudrama. This acclaimed and balanced movie faulted two administrations -- Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. But fairness was not what Hillary wanted. Screenwriter Cyrus Nowrasteh told me he had expected the customary DVD distribution. But the Clintons, fearing the impact of DVD release during her campaign, successfully pressured Disney, which owns ABC, to bury the movie. This is a portion of a news article that originally appeared: Hillary?s Path Back to 9/11 | Frontpage Mag This article originally appeared in The Huffington Post Hillary's Path Back to 9/11 | HuffPost This article was written by Arnold Steinberg from Huffington Post and was legally licensed through the NewsCred publisher network."
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    And we would have lost First Amendment rights under Hillary as well. The SCOTUS justice she would have appointed would have overturned Citizens United, which both Obama and Hillary opposed. For all of the rhetoric, please remember that Citizens United was about the government banning an anti-Hillary MOVIE!!! The First Amendment (barely) won, Obama and Hillary lost.

    Uhhh... why would Obama have lost? He actually won, and may have benefited from from this.... reminding this was 2008, before he even took office.

    Kut (thinks you can't blame EVERYTHING on Obama)
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,321
    113
    Gtown-ish
    That is true, there are other things, but Hillary would have appointed a justice to overturn Heller and MacDonald, and liberal federal judges would have fast-tracked cases to do just that. That would not be "nibbling around the edges" of a right and far from "sensible gun control"... it would be denying that the Second Amendment is an individual right... only a National Guard armory right.

    But it's more than just that. The kinds of justices that the Clinton's appoint are Ruth Ginsburgs. Progressives. People who think the constitution is outdated. People who think that the problem with America is that our system doesn't give enough **** away as positive rights. Guns are but one important issue of many that would be in a worse condition under a Clinton 2.0 admin.
     

    jbombelli

    ITG Certified
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    May 17, 2008
    13,057
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    I know this is a gun forum and what I'm about to say is akin to heresy but guns aren't the only thing. There are other important things as well.

    Without guns there is no free speech. That's the nature of government and power, with a helpless populace. You might want to read some history books.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    95   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    39,148
    113
    Btown Rural
    Democratic IT Staffer Arrested As He Tried to Flee the Country | Mediaite

    ...The group of IT staffers were also being suspected by authorities of putting sensitive House information on the “cloud” and possibly exposing it to others.


    Awan and his family are of Pakistani descent, and according to Democrat sources, their ethnicity “is a factor in the attention they’re receiving.”

    For months, Wasserman Schultz refused to allow U.S. Capitol Police to have access to her laptop as part of the investigation. She is now in negotiations to sharing her device with the authorities...
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,321
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Democratic IT Staffer Arrested As He Tried to Flee the Country | Mediaite

    ...The group of IT staffers were also being suspected by authorities of putting sensitive House information on the “cloud” and possibly exposing it to others.


    Awan and his family are of Pakistani descent, and according to Democrat sources, their ethnicity “is a factor in the attention they’re receiving.”

    For months, Wasserman Schultz refused to allow U.S. Capitol Police to have access to her laptop as part of the investigation. She is now in negotiations to sharing her device with the authorities...

    If we had an honest press this would be front page news.
     

    2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    26,343
    113
    NWI
    Dog bites man is not news = Democrats.

    Dog bites man is news = Republicans and anyone else the left wants to take down.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    95   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    39,148
    113
    Btown Rural
    Democratic IT Staffer Arrested As He Tried to Flee the Country | Mediaite

    ...The group of IT staffers were also being suspected by authorities of putting sensitive House information on the “cloud” and possibly exposing it to others.


    Awan and his family are of Pakistani descent, and according to Democrat sources, their ethnicity “is a factor in the attention they’re receiving.”

    For months, Wasserman Schultz refused to allow U.S. Capitol Police to have access to her laptop as part of the investigation. She is now in negotiations to sharing her device with the authorities...

    https://www.legistorm.com/person/Imran_Awan/10491.html

    Imran Awan, Congressional Staffer - Salary Data

    Rep. André Carson (D-IN) 01/03/17 02/08/17 Shared Employee $2,000.00
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,321
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Trump: Transgenders can't serve Military "In Any Capacity".

    Rationality is probably the best way to react to Transgenders in the military. It is a mental condition in which affected people are uncomfortable with their genitalia. So it's a question of whether their disorder inhibits their and other soldiers' ability to do their jobs.

    The thing that determines their fitness for service should not be their or our feelings, but should be their usefulness and ability to carry out their duties. If Trump's decision is based on a recommendation by military leadership who have done the necessary evaluations, there's no reason to complain. I suspect this decision is just as politically motivated as Obama's was to let them serve.
     

    Dddrees

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 23, 2016
    3,188
    38
    Central
    Repeal and Replace fails so it looks like Repeal Only is up next.

    So do you think they'll get their act together if only they had another seven years?


    Not only that but do you think they'll ever be able to do anything with Tax Reform or the Infastructure.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom