Romulus
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2012
- Messages
- 324
- Reaction score
- 112
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."
When those decisions are made by unelected bureaucrats, yes. The government decides what poisons to put in your PB if you're Chinese. In America, the free market keeps your PB safe. You may point to FDA and falsely claim they keep your PB safe, but in reality profit motive keeps your PB safe. The industries safety standards are higher than the government's in the U.S.
I don't want a bumpstock, the fact you think I do proves you don't read well. My point isn't that bumpstocks are legal or illegal, my problem is that they were declared legal by unelected bureaucrats. Even though full auto weapons were banned nearly a century ago.
When the colonies began to complain about paying direct taxes without representation in Parliament, defenders of that system claimed the colonists had de facto representation. You are making the same case here. Also, those agencies don't have to adhere to "rules and laws" because they make the "rules and laws" without the consent of the people.
So, let me this striaght, regulations that keep poison out of our PB is equal to lack of regulation in China that allows it in the PB? Is this your position?
When those decisions are made by unelected bureaucrats, yes. The government decides what poisons to put in your PB if you're Chinese. In America, the free market keeps your PB safe. You may point to FDA and falsely claim they keep your PB safe, but in reality profit motive keeps your PB safe. The industries safety standards are higher than the government's in the U.S.
And who would want that weapon? For what purpose? And people are elected, who place people into roles, and these agencies have to adhere to rules and laws. These rules and alws are ususally pushed by people not in government. People who lobby and push elected officials. The government doesn't usually do this compeltely on their own. You have to know how this works.
I don't want a bumpstock, the fact you think I do proves you don't read well. My point isn't that bumpstocks are legal or illegal, my problem is that they were declared legal by unelected bureaucrats. Even though full auto weapons were banned nearly a century ago.
When the colonies began to complain about paying direct taxes without representation in Parliament, defenders of that system claimed the colonists had de facto representation. You are making the same case here. Also, those agencies don't have to adhere to "rules and laws" because they make the "rules and laws" without the consent of the people.