Trump considering General Mattis for Secretary Of Defense

I appreciate that, thank you.

I'm curious about something: I'm assuming that you probably vote on a Liberal basis (if I'm wrong about that, then I apologize). And yet you support Gun Rights. How do you reason that?

I imagine it's probably much like me being a member of the LGBT community and voting Republican. Do you simply prioritize things accordingly?

 

I never ask.

 

i am for some basic mostly unobtrusive regulation that will save innocent lives, (background checks, criminal and mentally unstable regulation, waiting periods) but for the most part, people should have the right to buy as many guns, as they see fit. i think it is a mighty fine right to have, and to be able to protect ourselves and those we care about. "a rifle behind every blade of grass" and all that. whether that is with a gun is up to each person. that being said, i think most liberals are in this camp. we dont want to "take your guns away". at least i dont!

 

Wow! You are spot on. For sure, it ain't going to happen.

 

dont be shy

 

Oh! now we are giving examples of the meaning of infringement.

 

Don't want to know.

 

maybe not every paranoid schizophrenic should have a gun. just my opinion though.

 

Perhaps not but that isn't what you previously posted. Nor is it defined anywhere with any specificity. Write an amendment to the amendment, perhaps you can be cogent and adequately specific.

 

you got me man, if i could figure that out i sure wouldnt be here yelling at clouds with you.

how about "if you are taking medication for schizophrenia, you cant own a gun."

i know that would bum a few people out, meh.

 

On paper, those sound great.

In practice, they are far more obtrusive to Gun Owners and those who want to purchase a gun than they are to stopping criminals from purchasing one.

Take for example "Universal Background Checks". We already have those, and yet I've argued with people till I was blue in the face who are convinced that there is no such thing as background checks, ever.

Every time a person buys a gun through an FFL, they are REQUIRED by Federal Law to go through a background check. Period. There are no exceptions to this.

Same with gun shows, which many Liberals are convinced are this mythical place of shady deals and criminal activity. Every time I've bought or sold a gun at a gun show over the years, I've had to go through a background check. Every. Single. Time.

The problem people get confused on is Private Sales. But Private Sales are....wait for it....PRIVATE. It's not the government's business, nor is it my FFL's business. And NO documented mass shooting has ever occurred in this country from a privately-purchased gun without a background check. Ever. They account for less than 1% of the 1% of total gun crimes in this country!

Now you have states like Washington and Oregon who mandate that Private Sales must go through an FFL to receive a background check. Which effectively bans and outlaws private sales. So now I have to pay some asshole in a gun shop upwards of $100 not just for the background check....but also to TRANSFER the gun to the buyer!

I don't have that kind of money. And unless I make the buyer pay for my half (in addition to his half...because he also gets charged for a background check).

So in that sense, it IS obtrusive. Very much so.

Mental Health Checks. Short of the government demanding or requesting my PRIVATE medical history, there is NO constitutional way to enforce this (violates Right To Privacy laws). So it's a non-issue; as it should be. Because medical privacy SHOULD be one of the few things that we have a Right To Privacy for.

Waiting Periods. You think that Joe Criminal, who's either unstable or plotting a crime, is going to abort his plan because he has to wait 10 days vs 10 minutes?

I don't think so. If you're determined to commit a crime, then you're determined to wait until the right time to do it.

Not to mention that there's already one case where a waiting period actually costed a woman her life. I believe it was in New Jersey. She bought a gun to protect herself from her violently abusive ex husband (IIRC), and was required to wait 30 days. He killed her during that waiting period.

Sorry, but there's a reason why those of us who study these issues feel the way that we do about this subject. On paper, Liberals talking points sound very good when it comes to guns, and it sells very well (as is proof by the recent gun legislation backed by Bloomberg which passed here in Washington by 70% of voters).

But in practice, they are either not necessary at the least, or dangerous at the most.

 

Well, they maybe complete rational, far more reliable than people on their daily drug of choice used to cope with the pressures of our wonderful world.

 

yeah, maybe

 

there are people who study these issues who feel the exact opposite.

i think, as with most things, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

I suspect I have at least as much understanding of the gun issue as you do.....and possibly more so. And I was relating exactly what I saw and heard with my own eyes and ears. I'm sorry you feel those two senses have lied to me. And you certainly seem to think (and imply) that the anti Trump folks are "paranoid nutjobs" because they don't see things the way YOU do. As I stated in another post in another thread, all we're going through is role reversal. The left had to listen to the right whine and wring it's hands for the past 8 years. Before that, the right had to hear the left whine and wring it's hands for 8 years. And before that yada, yada, yada.......Jeezus, enjoy your boy's victory while you can and don't delude yourself that the left won't have it's turn again sooner rather than later. And as I said, a reactionary of any stripe is still a reactionary, and both ideologies are chock a block full of them.......

 

Because I don't know you, your history, or what you have/have not studied in regards to this topic, then I'll reserve judgement on this statement

However, if you are like the countless other Liberal-leaning folks I've encountered over the years who use Michael Bloomberg and MomsDemandAction as their sources of information, then I promise you I'm more knowledgeable about this topic than you are.

But again: I don't know you, so I reserve judgement appropriately.

I don't think they're paranoid nutjobs; I think they're fucking morons.

To me, a paranoid nutjob is someone who believes Sandy Hook and 9/11 were both Conspiracies by our government.

But a moron is someone who thinks that Trump is going to sneak into their house and murder them while they're masturbating.

Trust me....a paranoid nutjob is WAY worse than a simple moron.

And yes, you have my permission to use that as Sig material.

I suppose you have a point there. But it's funny how neither side ever admits to any wrong-doing, huh?

 

We have facts, logic, reason, and Constitutional Scholars on our side.

They have emotion and cherry-picked statistics, as well as straw-man arguments of what our country should be like based on others.

Who would YOU trust? Because to me, it's a no-brainer.

 

My understanding is that sociopaths are incapable of admitting to being wrong........and just another great reason to toss the current two party system into the dumpster.....

 

You bring up a good point. It's a known fact that many with sociopath tenancies tend to work in high office; either in politics or business. The reason being that they crave power and control.

 

Hopefully Mattis gets rid of the stupid fucking females in combat jobs experiment.

And the tattoos restrictions.
And the paying for transgender surgeries.