Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
press conference
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BrandonMF" data-source="post: 2065209" data-attributes="member: 13086"><p>If you're a big enough tool to answer that question honestly to someone whose business it certainly is not, then yes, Sir, you deserve what you get.</p><p></p><p>The EO list isn't too bad, on the surface. I'll be the first to admit I"m not smart enough to "get" certain political maneuvering at a glance like some people on here. However, if that really is all he's doing with EO, then he's doing good. There are a lot of things with the NICS that could be fixed. Restricting a man or woman with Bi-Polar Disorder from owning a gun is screwed, but restricting someone with Bi-Polar disorder who is violent from owning guns isn't a bad thing. The only problem is a lot of these measures give more power to government to decide what level of a mental disorder is and is not prohibited. Hell I know for certain that I would be labeled manic-depressive/bi-polar. I disagree with Number 17, as a lot of people would construe us as crazy for stating the second amendment is about protecting your rights from Tyranny and therefore a threat against federal LE. Some of them could even potentially be true "common sense" plugs to potential problems in already existing 2nd amendment legislation. </p><p></p><p>TLDR; Some of the EOs make sense but are open to Federalist interpretation and err on the side of Government restriction, but nothing truly devastating unless left open to the interpretation of truly sick individuals, IE the left.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BrandonMF, post: 2065209, member: 13086"] If you're a big enough tool to answer that question honestly to someone whose business it certainly is not, then yes, Sir, you deserve what you get. The EO list isn't too bad, on the surface. I'll be the first to admit I"m not smart enough to "get" certain political maneuvering at a glance like some people on here. However, if that really is all he's doing with EO, then he's doing good. There are a lot of things with the NICS that could be fixed. Restricting a man or woman with Bi-Polar Disorder from owning a gun is screwed, but restricting someone with Bi-Polar disorder who is violent from owning guns isn't a bad thing. The only problem is a lot of these measures give more power to government to decide what level of a mental disorder is and is not prohibited. Hell I know for certain that I would be labeled manic-depressive/bi-polar. I disagree with Number 17, as a lot of people would construe us as crazy for stating the second amendment is about protecting your rights from Tyranny and therefore a threat against federal LE. Some of them could even potentially be true "common sense" plugs to potential problems in already existing 2nd amendment legislation. TLDR; Some of the EOs make sense but are open to Federalist interpretation and err on the side of Government restriction, but nothing truly devastating unless left open to the interpretation of truly sick individuals, IE the left. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
press conference
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom