House Passes Gun-Control Bill Expanding Background Checks on Firearm Sales

[Kar98]

On personal note, I'm Pro-Life and for the most part don't believe in abortion. Murder is murder.

But in too many cases, they are using tax-payer dollars to fund abortion, and they want even more money. IMO, too many women are using abortion as a means to birth-control because they are making poor life choices. Abortion should only be used in the most of extreme situations, and it should never be funded with money that comes from the tax-payers.

Pay for one abortion now, save thousands if not millions later in welfare, and/or incarceration.
The money saved can be used for meaningful sex ed, preventing unwanted pregnancies in first place.
Everybody wins!

 

[Kar98]

As far as I'm concerned, they owe gun owners going back to 1934!

So yes, not another inch will I give.

I'm thinking at the very least 1939, US vs Miller, when the courts ruled to be protected by the 2nd Amendment, a firearm HAS to be similar to the ones in common use by the military.

 

[Axxe55]

Pay for one abortion now, save thousands if not millions later in welfare, and/or incarceration.
The money saved can be used for meaningful sex ed, prevention unwanted pregnancies in first place.
Everybody wins!

There are many different sides to the issue of abortion. My viewpoint is simply one side of it. Not that my opinion or viewpoint is better or worse than others'

Even given your viewpoint, it still shouldn't be funded with tax-payer money, or the government. If people want abortions, then it should be privately funded. Pelosi can dig deep in her own pockets if she wants Planned Parenthood funded!

 

[gll]

On personal note, I'm Pro-Life and for the most part don't believe in abortion. Murder is murder.

But in too many cases, they are using tax-payer dollars to fund abortion, and they want even more money. IMO, too many women are using abortion as a means to birth-control because they are making poor life choices. Abortion should only be used in the most of extreme situations, and it should never be funded with money that comes from the tax-payers.

On a personal note, I have always been opposed to abortion, it's wrong, and evil, but those practicing it do so by choice, and number among our enemies as will their spawn more than likely.

 

[Kar98]

There are many different sides to the issue of abortion. My viewpoint is simply one side of it. Not that my opinion or viewpoint is better or worse than others'

Even given your viewpoint, it still shouldn't be funded with tax-payer money, or the government. If people want abortions, then it should be privately funded. Pelosi can dig deep in her own pockets if she wants Planned Parenthood funded!

But it would SAVE the taxpayer money in not even that long of a run.

 

[bbbass]

But it would SAVE the taxpayer money in not even that long of a run.

Murder of the unborn in the name of saving money. What a concept!!

 

[benenglish]

My question is why there are free citizens who cannot own a firearm. If they cannot own a firearm, they shouldn't be in free society.

Well, I gotta disagree. If someone is adjudicated mentally incompetent they may be peaceful. They may not deserve to be institutionalized. But they may simply be untrustworthy with a firearm. I don't have a problem with them being prohibited persons though I should also stress that I think that "adjudicated" bar needs to be set really, really high.

For all the other categories of prohibited persons (that I can call to mind at the moment), I agree with you.

 

[benenglish]

I've been speaking personally but now I've gotta put on my moderator hat.

Discussion of abortion inevitably leads to discussion of religion and that would be a violation of TGT rules. I suggest y'all let that subject go.

 

[Kar98]

We were having a friendly conversation and we both dropped it without any feelings of rage or the need for name calling. This isn’t Reddit

 

[Axxe55]

We were having a friendly conversation and we both dropped it without any feelings of rage or the need for name calling. This isn’t Reddit

What's Reddit?

Asking for a friend!

 

[TheDan]

 

[HawkeyeSATX]

My wife's Uncle, who is part of a law firm, started all of this anti gun law stuff back in the 70's, in California, because he had a partner, who inevitably, pissed off a client, ended up shooting the majority of the law firm out of existence, and her Uncle has been fighting to get all guns banned. He has studied "Constitutional" law, and has fought around every loophole you can imagine to restrict AR's, handguns, and not just semi auto ones.
He donates heavily to anti gun, even radical left politicians, because, the end justifies the means.
Her uncle doesn't give one spit about being able to defend yourself against an angry mob. He doesn't give one spit about criminals having firearms, and the law abiding public not having them.
To him, he wants all gun manufacturers banned, and bankrupt.
Where do you think these politicians get their ideas of taxing ammo to a point where no law abiding citizen can afford ammo?!? It's from him!
The Constitution never has, or had a clause about not taxing, or abolishing ammo. You see, there isn't a limit to doing that.
He thinks he's doing right. To him it's a necessary evil to fight anything about firearms, and ammo.
He doesn't look at the big picture.
Does anyone on here realize the major reason why Japan, never invaded the United States during WW2?
Their exact reason," We cannot invade the U.S., because there is a rifle behind every tree!"
Since after the War of 1812, no one has even thought of invading, because every military veteran that has served since then has had at least one rifle to defend himself, and his family.
We've got to ask ourselves, is it that our own government wants to make us it's subjects, or are there parties of outside influence, China, Russia, Iran, or whoever would like to see the American population disarmed, so they can nilly willy waltz in here and take us over in one fell swoop?!?
Remember what Nikita Kruschev, former Soviet Premier said," We will tear you apart from the inside out! We won't come at you with our army, we will have agents working for decades to tear down everything you hold dear! We will destroy the family unit! We will destroy your way of life, from the inside. By the time you realize what is happening, it will be too late."
Well, the Russians weren't able to do so, but it looks like the Chinese Communist Party is doing that same exact thing. They've had politicians in their pockets since Bill Clinton was in office. Even Slick Willy took monetary donations from the Chinese Communist Party. All the way up to today, the "honorable" Eric Swalwell, from California, has been receiving monies from them, and he's been feeding them intel ever since he's been on the Intel Committee.
So, I think we as Americans, need to start doing some serious spring cleaning in our own country, and get rid of these politicians that have been bankrolled by China!


Hawk

Sent from my REVVLRY+ using Tapatalk

 

[Axxe55]

Well said Hawkeye, very well said.

 

[Kar98]

What's Reddit?

Asking for a friend!

Cancer.

 

[tonelar]

I remember the SF attack that spawned the LCAV. These lawyers went through a name change since then, but have actively tried to influence states outside CA for years.

 

[bbbass]

Cancer.

I would have said NSFW...

 

[bbbass]

The Constitution never has, or had a clause about not taxing, or abolishing ammo. You see, there isn't a limit to doing that.

An historian friend (I still find it odd that I have to use "an" instead of "a") insists that ammo, and all firearm attachments, are considered part and parcel of "arms" under the 2A, and therefore cannot be prohibited.

That brings up the question of whether as such taxes on those items can be considered "infringed".

 

[bbbass]

I've been speaking personally but now I've gotta put on my moderator hat.

Discussion of abortion inevitably leads to discussion of religion and that would be a violation of TGT rules. I suggest y'all let that subject go.

My religion is Triggernometry...

 

[Axxe55]

An historian friend (I still find it odd that I have to use "an" instead of "a") insists that ammo, and all firearm attachments, are considered part and parcel of "arm" under the 2A, and therefore cannot be prohibited.

That brings up the question of whether as such taxes on those items can be considered "infringed".

I would consider excessive taxes, used to restrict law-abiding citizens from being able to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights as an infringement upon those rights.

 

[bbbass]

I would consider excessive taxes, used to restrict law-abiding citizens from being able to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights as an infringement upon those rights.

How then would you determine if the taxes are being used in such a manner?

And what of Pitman-Robertson taxes? Those were kinda voluntary at the time enacted IIRC.