• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'Enough is enough,' Feinstein says in proposing new gun ban [W:93]

That was just one of my questions. Which shows the law was never ruled to be unconstitutional.


Here are my 4 questions you did not answer?

You say you go by the Constitution, right?

Who is authorized under the Constitution with judicial powers?

Is it Madison?

Is it you?

Honestly? Those don't deserve answers, but ok..

Yes.
SC
No
No

Now, answer my two questions.
 
I've seen 4 polls, two of them conservative polls, that all come up with pretty much the same results.

Supply links including EXACTLY what was asked for these polls. These goofy summary stories about "the topic" mean nothing! People that like the question, regardless of what it "means to them", vote accordingly. If gun control, AWB and MCL were so popular then why ZERO mention during the 2012 campaign? Hmm...
 
Last edited:
You guys are pathetic. I meant bill obviously.

Then you should say "Bill" Just because some idiot proposes a bill it means squat untill Congress makes it a law. To get all upset over something like this is silly. It won't go anywhere. Reid has already said he won't put it up for vote the way it is now.
 
Then you should say "Bill" Just because some idiot proposes a bill it means squat untill Congress makes it a law. To get all upset over something like this is silly. It won't go anywhere. Reid has already said he won't put it up for vote the way it is now.
the entire purpose of the douche bag from california's idiocy is to try to make some other blatant idiocy look more reasonable
 
the entire purpose of the douche bag from california's idiocy is to try to make some other blatant idiocy look more reasonable

And it still means squat until Congress votes on it.
 
Then you should say "Bill" Just because some idiot proposes a bill it means squat untill Congress makes it a law. To get all upset over something like this is silly. It won't go anywhere. Reid has already said he won't put it up for vote the way it is now.

What people propose says something about the people behind them. Many times these crazy ass bills years done the road come up again except this time it's no longer crazy but something the majority of those in office believe in.
 
And it still means squat until Congress votes on it.

what is important is that a leader of your party-the senior senator from one of the most populous states in the country, wants to impose laws on honest people that should cause her to be impeached-or worse. that asshole has publicly admitted that she wanted to actually confiscate all the weapons listed in the 94 ban and that would have justified-in the minds of many-someone whacking her if it came to that. What that asshole wants is to push people to the point that they start ignoring or breaking the law so she an use it as an excuse to deem many people criminals so they will have their weapons confiscated

you as a citizen should be hateful towards any politician who engages in such idiocy knowing full well that her schemes are not based on any legitimate public interest
 
What people propose says something about the people behind them. Many times these crazy ass bills years done the road come up again except this time it's no longer crazy but something the majority of those in office believe in.

Do you really think something this stupid has any chance of even getting brought up for a vote much less put into law by Congress. Reid, the leader of the Senate, the same party as Fienstien has said he will not bring it to a vote, that effectively kills the bill. Now she can rewrite it, make some changes to it and try again, but this bill is DOA. Plus it would have to pass Congress.
 
Supply links including EXACTLY what was asked for these polls. These goofy summary stories about "the topic" mean nothing! People that like the question, regardless of what it "means to them", vote accordingly. If gun control, AWB and MCL were so popular then why ZERO mention during the 2012 campaign? Hmm...

Here are 3 more -

Americans Back Obama's Proposals to Address Gun Violence

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Studies

http://www.770kob.com/abc_news/article/Poll:_Majority_Sees_Obama’s_Gun_Control_Plan_Favorably/C1114D63662211E2B03FFEFDADE6840A/


Now where are the polls that show a majority oppose the president's proposals?
 
what is important is that a leader of your party-the senior senator from one of the most populous states in the country, wants to impose laws on honest people that should cause her to be impeached-or worse. that asshole has publicly admitted that she wanted to actually confiscate all the weapons listed in the 94 ban and that would have justified-in the minds of many-someone whacking her if it came to that. What that asshole wants is to push people to the point that they start ignoring or breaking the law so she an use it as an excuse to deem many people criminals so they will have their weapons confiscated

you as a citizen should be hateful towards any politician who engages in such idiocy knowing full well that her schemes are not based on any legitimate public interest

Immature remarks like this just shows that you really need to learn how a bill becomes a law. Your post are mildly humorous but that's about all they're good for.
 
Honestly? Those don't deserve answers, but ok..

Yes.
SC
No
No

Now, answer my two questions.

Glad you finally admit that only the Supreme Court is authorized with judicial powers!

No what questions do you have?
 
Immature remarks like this just shows that you really need to learn how a bill becomes a law. Your post are mildly humorous but that's about all they're good for.

your idiotic response has nothing to do with what I said. I know who a bill becomes law and you apparently didn't bother reading what I wrote. I was talking about the fact that one of your beloved matriarchs of the Democratic Party suggested gun confiscation

lets suppose a far right GOP senator from the south suggested electronic monitoring for all black males under the age of 40 due to the fact that 35% or so of them are going to be convicted of a felony. Of course such an idiotic bill would not become law. But we damn sure know that the democrats would be bashing the GOP for even harboring one person making such a suggestion

that's the point you apparently couldn't comprehend. that one of the leaders of YOUR PARTY wanted to basically start a civil war by confiscating property that is legally owned
 
Do you really think something this stupid has any chance of even getting brought up for a vote much less put into law by Congress. Reid, the leader of the Senate, the same party as Fienstien has said he will not bring it to a vote, that effectively kills the bill. Now she can rewrite it, make some changes to it and try again, but this bill is DOA. Plus it would have to pass Congress.

I'm talking about future congresses. These things have tendency to not die.
 
your idiotic response has nothing to do with what I said. I know who a bill becomes law and you apparently didn't bother reading what I wrote. I was talking about the fact that one of your beloved matriarchs of the Democratic Party suggested gun confiscation

lets suppose a far right GOP senator from the south suggested electronic monitoring for all black males under the age of 40 due to the fact that 35% or so of them are going to be convicted of a felony. Of course such an idiotic bill would not become law. But we damn sure know that the democrats would be bashing the GOP for even harboring one person making such a suggestion

that's the point you apparently couldn't comprehend. that one of the leaders of YOUR PARTY wanted to basically start a civil war by confiscating property that is legally owned

Had you bothered to read you would have seen that I called this bill stupid more then once. I also have no party, unlike you I don't want or need anyone telling me what to think or say. Comments like your response is what makes your post merely comical. You do not have the maturity to have a discussion without the silly school yard games. And if you feel she has done something to warrant impeachment then by all means go ahead and file charges. If you're a US citizen and have the intestinal fortitude, you have the right to file charges.
 
Had you bothered to read you would have seen that I called this bill stupid more then once. I also have no party, unlike you I don't want or need anyone telling me what to think or say. Comments like your response is what makes your post merely comical. You do not have the maturity to have a discussion without the silly school yard games. And if you feel she has done something to warrant impeachment then by all means go ahead and file charges. If you're a US citizen and have the intestinal fortitude, you have the right to file charges.

its funny seeing someone who has been here what-two weeks-pretend to be the arbiter of what is proper decorum. I asked the US attorney in the Southern District of Ohio (Greg Lockhart) under bush to indict Bloomturd for his conspiracy to violate federal gun charges. I asked my congressman (Chabot) and Senator (Portman) to move to impeach the Loughner District Judge for claiming "assault weapons" need to be confiscated

who did you vote for in the last presidential election?
 
Post #24.

:waiting:

Still nothing. Well, its bed time now, but it was fun watching Catawba do everything to avoid the questions and still be left with the questions standing there waiting for him to answer them.
 
I'm talking about future congresses. These things have tendency to not die.

I understood what you were talking about, I just don't see it happening now or in the future. To worry about something this stupid that might or might not happen 10 or 15 years down the road is a waste of time IMO. These guns were banned for a lot of years and I never heard of anyone going around confiscating guns from law abiding citizens. What I see happening when and if Congress takes up any new gun laws is a bann on magazine size and gun registering for all gun sales in gun shops, gun shows, and private sales. IMO if I were to sell one of my guns to someone I would want it to go thru a FFL holder. Should the person I sold it to go out and commit a crime of some kind I would want it known that the gun was legally sold and no longer under my control.
 
its funny seeing someone who has been here what-two weeks-pretend to be the arbiter of what is proper decorum. I asked the US attorney in the Southern District of Ohio (Greg Lockhart) under bush to indict Bloomturd for his conspiracy to violate federal gun charges. I asked my congressman (Chabot) and Senator (Portman) to move to impeach the Loughner District Judge for claiming "assault weapons" need to be confiscated

who did you vote for in the last presidential election?

Instead of asking someone to do it for you, Man up and do it yourself. I voted third party this past election. I bet you voted Romney.
 
Instead of asking someone to do it for you, Man up and do it yourself. I voted third party this past election. I bet you voted Romney.

I did, he was the best alternative to the current disaster. You threw your vote away

and who was it? the socialist or the green party candidate
 
I understood what you were talking about, I just don't see it happening now or in the future. To worry about something this stupid that might or might not happen 10 or 15 years down the road is a waste of time IMO. These guns were banned for a lot of years and I never heard of anyone going around confiscating guns from law abiding citizens. What I see happening when and if Congress takes up any new gun laws is a bann on magazine size and gun registering for all gun sales in gun shops, gun shows, and private sales. IMO if I were to sell one of my guns to someone I would want it to go thru a FFL holder. Should the person I sold it to go out and commit a crime of some kind I would want it known that the gun was legally sold and no longer under my control.

that's a good argument-I have the following rules about guns I sell or give away

1) family

2) licensed attorneys (if you have a felony-they pull your license)

3) law enforcement officers or prosecutors

4) gun store (FFL) employees

and if I have a gun I don't want or I can get a good bit of $$$ on I will have my local gun shop sell it on consignment for the reasons you posted

I sold a ton of stuff when Clinton imposed his ban and netted about 22K. MOst of the guns I bought was in anticipation of that and I sold them through the dealer so they were papered and because someone cannot claim I was dealing without a license
 
Post #24.

:waiting:

There is no well regulated militia to infringe upon. And you have already agreed that Madison does not have Judicial powers under the Constitution.
 
I did, he was the best alternative to the current disaster. You threw your vote away

and who was it? the socialist or the green party candidate

Until you get some maturity and are able to discuss things without the 3rd grade school yard games, I'll not respond to anymore of your post.
 
Back
Top Bottom