Why bother with the GOP if this is all it has to offer?

[Dean C.]

Millions of outside dollars flowed into Ohio to win the vote so it was not done be the state by itself. Libertarian does not work in the real world. How would you feel if the 51% wanted to ban guns?

That is one of the nice things about Indiana , per our constitution you would need yet another constitutional amendment to allow for any law to impact firearms per Section 32 of the 1851 Indiana State Constitution "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

First draft of Indiana gun control bill introduced, 2nd Amendment lawyer says it’s ‘dead on arrival’

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana State Sen. Fady Qaddoura said a new bill he plans to file in the next few weeks seeks to counteract the state’s pre-emption law — a law that’s been on the books s…

fox59.com

But some Dems want to strike down pre-emption in order to enact gun control at the county level, which is insane.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

That is one of the nice things about Indiana , per our constitution you would need yet another constitutional amendment to allow for any law to impact firearms per Section 32 of the 1851 Indiana State Constitution "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

First draft of Indiana gun control bill introduced, 2nd Amendment lawyer says it’s ‘dead on arrival’

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana State Sen. Fady Qaddoura said a new bill he plans to file in the next few weeks seeks to counteract the state’s pre-emption law — a law that’s been on the books s…

fox59.com

But some Dems want to strike down pre-emption in order to enact gun control at the county level, which is insane.

I'm confused. I thought you were arguing in favor of ballot initiatives, which could result in just such legislation (reversing preemption).

 

[BugI02]

Marriage was out in quotes for a reason. Marriage is between a man a woman for the purpose of creating a family. Families can't always be created or are not always created.

I don't believe government should be in the business of marriage. I don't promote homosexuality. I don't wish for it. But the government need not be involved.

In all of our bloviating, we all sometimes forget that individuals causing no harm to others do have the right to be left alone.

Indeed, but the more radical among the LGBTQEIEIO would not accept the functional equivalent of marriage, it had to be all or nothing. When they 'marry' in some Unitarian Universalist church or some such, do they really believe God has joined them in holy matrimony? Maybe. They believe a great deal of other things that certainly are not true

The desire to be left alone, however, goes both ways. I will not bake the cake

By trying to force acceptance I think they do the cause of just being seen as regular people who live differently great harm

 

[INPatriot]

Indeed, but the more radical among the LGBTQEIEIO would not accept the functional equivalent of marriage, it had to be all or nothing. When they 'marry' in some Unitarian Universalist church or some such, do they really believe God has joined them in holy matrimony? Maybe. They believe a great deal of other things that certainly are not true

The desire to be left alone, however, goes both ways. I will not bake the cake

By trying to force acceptance I think they do the cause of just being seen as regular people who live differently great harm

I do not believe they believe God has joined them in holy matrimony. Their god is the LGBTQEIEIO ideology.

But that group does not believe in small r republican government. They don't believe in the Constitution and they want to invalidate because of slavery.

I'm not trying to get that group to buy in.

 

[Leadeye]

Had to look up "furry people" I'm seeing now that it has nothing to do with Dr. Moreau.

 

[Cynical]

Incorrect. Three of the four greatest areas of FedGov spending support transfer payments and the Military Industrial Complex while the fourth is the cost of debt service. Good luck getting the recipients of such largesse to vote for their own impoverishment



What you need to do is convince an unstoppable majority of the electorate, of both parties, that debt is an existential threat and must be brought under control by every means possible - at which point most congressmen from both parties will fight to weaken the strictures enacted to protect their chosen groups who support them and try to leverage distaste for austerity for political gain. Humanity just does not respond to a future crisis, only the ones that are (or they feel are) already upon them

That was well written, I concur.

 

[DadSmith]

So to be clear, you're cool with anyone with any mental illness not being allowed firearms, which would be significantly more restrictive than current red flag laws?

Are you?


After studying this out I am wrong in the belief that admitting yourself to a hospital for mental illness bars one from owning a firearm. It must be court ordered.


This part of the 4473 form confused me.
“Have you ever been adjudicated as a mental defective OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?”

 

[Ingomike]

That is one of the nice things about Indiana , per our constitution you would need yet another constitutional amendment to allow for any law to impact firearms per Section 32 of the 1851 Indiana State Constitution "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State."

I am puzzled by your responses? In Indiana to change the constitution it must pass the legislature, pass a referendum, and pass another legislature session. In Ohio they just need a referendum that garners 50.00000000000001% to change the constitution…

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Are you?

I would think my response is self-evident given my previous statements, but to be clear Obviously not. Huge swathes of the population have some form of mental illness but are not a threat to themselves or others.

You brought it up, so I'm curious as to where you draw the line if your afraid of trans- people with guns.

 

[DadSmith]

I would think my response is self-evident given my previous statements, but to be clear Obviously not. Huge swathes of the population have some form of mental illness but are not a threat to themselves or others.

You brought it up, so I'm curious as to where you draw the line if your afraid of trans- people with guns.

I've stated my beliefs of transgenders with guns.
Maybe I'm wrong in thinking most transgenders are angry at those who disagree with their lifestyle, and transgenders want to do harm against those who stand against them like the Tennessee school shooter, and those huge transgender pride marchs were they basically say that among other things like coming for your children etc.

Giving people like that a badge, and a gun what can go wrong?

 

[Twangbanger]

I've stated my beliefs of transgenders with guns.
Maybe I'm wrong in thinking most transgenders are angry at those who disagree with their lifestyle, and transgenders want to do harm against those who stand against them like the Tennessee school shooter, and those huge transgender pride marchs were they basically say that among other things like coming for your children etc.

Giving people like that a badge, and a gun what can go wrong?

If they have a uniform, it's okay, silly...you knew that.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I've stated my beliefs of transgenders with guns.
Maybe I'm wrong in thinking most transgenders are angry at those who disagree with their lifestyle, and transgenders want to do harm against those who stand against them like the Tennessee school shooter, and those huge transgender pride marchs were they basically say that among other things like coming for your children etc.

Giving people like that a badge, and a gun what can go wrong?

I can count on zero fingers the number of trans- murderers I've dealt with. A hand full of robberies, including one who's African immigrant family did *not* take it well when they saw him dressed like a woman doing a robbery (more upset about that than the robbery, I think). I'm not real worried. I remember when INGO was all about 'bring it on Soiboy' and now you're scared the 2nd amendment applies to a group of people, some of whom are violent? I guess there's no way that line of thinking could go poorly. I wonder who does more shootings, trans- or incels? Maybe virgins shouldn't be eligible for legal gun ownership.

Jenner did buy a gun, IIRC. I'm surprised we're not all dead already.

 

[foszoe]

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

[jamil]

The voters even sent him back a second time.

That’s because so many Hoosiers had the mindset that they’d vote for a dog if that’s who Republicans ran. A wolf is close enough I guess.

 

[BugI02]

I would think my response is self-evident given my previous statements, but to be clear Obviously not. Huge swathes of the population have some form of mental illness but are not a threat to themselves or others.

You brought it up, so I'm curious as to where you draw the line if your afraid of trans- people with guns.

If anyone is still worried about their leaves, if you live in the right type of suburb you just rake or blow them to the curb and the city comes and gets them to make into mulch

 

[BugI02]

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

We're still working on the socialists/cordwood thing

You've probably got time to actually speak up, if you think anyone will listen

 

[Tombs]

I do not believe they believe God has joined them in holy matrimony. Their god is the LGBTQEIEIO ideology.

But that group does not believe in small r republican government. They don't believe in the Constitution and they want to invalidate because of slavery.

I'm not trying to get that group to buy in.

Their God is themselves.

This is how they can justify twisting your language and forcing you to use their vocabulary to suit their vanity.

For example, would it practically matter if it was called a civil union? No, but that would hurt their vanity, therefor they need to force you to change the definition of words to suit them.

Just like they can't be happy just being tolerated to dress up like a woman and behave in an insulting and demeaning stereotype, they need you to admit that they are a woman, because of their vanity.

 

[loudgroove]

Their God is themselves.

This is how they can justify twisting your language and forcing you to use their vocabulary to suit their vanity.

For example, would it practically matter if it was called a civil union? No, but that would hurt their vanity, therefor they need to force you to change the definition of words to suit them.

Just like they can't be happy just being tolerated to dress up like a woman and behave in an insulting and demeaning stereotype, they need you to admit that they are a woman, because of their vanity.

This reminds me of the word "Woke". They seem to not want to change that definition. It used to mean just being aware of racial prejudice. Now its anyone or anything trying to shove identity politics down everyone's throat. I personally never understood how we all can come together as one people as long as we are pointing out our differences. And no liberal that has thrown a fit about the use of the word woke has been able to explain that to me. lol

 

[EricG]

The Libertarian home is a welcoming home.

 

[INPatriot]

Their God is themselves.

This is how they can justify twisting your language and forcing you to use their vocabulary to suit their vanity.

For example, would it practically matter if it was called a civil union? No, but that would hurt their vanity, therefor they need to force you to change the definition of words to suit them.

Just like they can't be happy just being tolerated to dress up like a woman and behave in an insulting and demeaning stereotype, they need you to admit that they are a woman, because

Their God is themselves.

This is how they can justify twisting your language and forcing you to use their vocabulary to suit their vanity.

For example, would it practically matter if it was called a civil union? No, but that would hurt their vanity, therefor they need to force you to change the definition of words to suit them.

Just like they can't be happy just being tolerated to dress up like a woman and behave in an insulting and demeaning stereotype, they need you to admit that they are a woman, because of their vanity.

100%