• 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!

Full control of government, basically.

Bark

Bark

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
263
Location
Houston, Tx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
So now that the GOP owns the house, senate, presidency, and has a good majority of governors, plus the supreme court pick, maybe picks, what gonna happen? For years the GOP has convinced their base that filibusters, government shut downs, poisonous amendments to bill, etc were vital to the destiny of the country. Now there is no need for any of those tactics. Fully in control, the ball is in their court. Any guesses on the priority list?
 
Bark said:
So now that the GOP owns the house, senate, presidency, and has a good majority of governors, plus the supreme court pick, maybe picks, what gonna happen? For years the GOP has convinced their base that filibusters, government shut downs, poisonous amendments to bill, etc were vital to the destiny of the country. Now there is no need for any of those tactics. Fully in control, the ball is in their court. Any guesses on the priority list?
Click to expand...
\

Get re-elected. What else?
 
Bark said:
So now that the GOP owns the house, senate, presidency, and has a good majority of governors, plus the supreme court pick, maybe picks, what gonna happen? For years the GOP has convinced their base that filibusters, government shut downs, poisonous amendments to bill, etc were vital to the destiny of the country. Now there is no need for any of those tactics. Fully in control, the ball is in their court. Any guesses on the priority list?
Click to expand...

Trumps priority seems to be EO's right now, revoking Obama's and making good on campaign promises. Ryan's is Obamacare.

My hope is for the hearing protection act and concealed carry reciprocity to pass. Might not even be too hopeful to think Constitutional Carry has a shot if the SC gets stacked.
 
Bark said:
So now that the GOP owns the house, senate, presidency, and has a good majority of governors, plus the supreme court pick, maybe picks, what gonna happen? For years the GOP has convinced their base that filibusters, government shut downs, poisonous amendments to bill, etc were vital to the destiny of the country. Now there is no need for any of those tactics. Fully in control, the ball is in their court. Any guesses on the priority list?
Click to expand...

Repeal the ACA. They voted to do it over 50 times. Now they can finally do it. What's the holdup? It's already written. Your voters told you to do it, even gave you a mandate. Toss that bad boy on Trump's desk and let him sign it. Or not.
 
trblmkr said:
Repeal the ACA. They voted to do it over 50 times. Now they can finally do it. What's the holdup? It's already written. Your voters told you to do it, even gave you a mandate. Toss that bad boy on Trump's desk and let him sign it. Or not.
Click to expand...

I'd argue with the mandate, but yeah, put up now or admit you were wasting tax money preening and posturing.
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Trumps priority seems to be EO's right now, revoking Obama's and making good on campaign promises. Ryan's is Obamacare.

My hope is for the hearing protection act and concealed carry reciprocity to pass. Might not even be too hopeful to think Constitutional Carry has a shot if the SC gets stacked.
Click to expand...

I like guns, but still... CC cool with, but silencers because of hearing damage is just silly.

The simple and obvious expedients of wearing earplugs or ear covers are alternately dubbed inadequate to protect hearing and a drag on the social experience of shooting.
NRA wants to suppress one of guns' most important safety features - Chicago Tribune
 
Bark said:
I like guns, but
Click to expand...

You know nothing anyone says before the word but really matters, right?

Bark said:
still... CC cool with, but silencers because of hearing damage is just silly.
Click to expand...

Silly? Its silly to not want to suffer permanent hearing loss if I choose to defend myself? The tax/regulation is silly, as is the notion that they're "silencers."

What good reason is there to not allow them? Would you have them outright banned?

 
Spartacus FPV said:
You know nothing anyone says before the word but really matters, right?



Silly? Its silly to not want to suffer permanent hearing loss if I choose to defend myself? The tax/regulation is silly, as is the notion that they're "silencers."

What good reason is there to not allow them? Would you have them outright banned?

Click to expand...


Lol, you might be right about that, BUT.... I own guns. I go to the range. I'm an efin Texan! I like guns, but.....

Did you read the quote or link from the proponents of the law?

"The simple and obvious expedients of wearing earplugs or ear covers are alternately dubbed inadequate to protect hearing and a drag on the social experience of shooting."

The act of banning is not a bad thing. You may own a tank, but not it's functional gun. That is a ban I stand behind. Fully auto machine guns, special license. I can stand behind that regulation. Bans and regulations are a big part of the second amendment. Ever hear of an illegal knife? That is a ban regarding arm, the second amendment.

In full disclosure, I don't see anything wrong with suppressors. The issue is the argument. "drag on the social experience" or if you prefer "why should I have to..."
 
Bark said:
Lol, you might be right about that, BUT.... I own guns. I go to the range. I'm an efin Texan! I like guns, but.....

Did you read the quote or link from the proponents of the law?

"The simple and obvious expedients of wearing earplugs or ear covers are alternately dubbed inadequate to protect hearing and a drag on the social experience of shooting."

The act of banning is not a bad thing. You may own a tank, but not it's functional gun. That is a ban I stand behind. Fully auto machine guns, special license. I can stand behind that regulation. Bans and regulations are a big part of the second amendment. Ever hear of an illegal knife? That is a ban regarding arm, the second amendment.

In full disclosure, I don't see anything wrong with suppressors. The issue is the argument. "drag on the social experience" or if you prefer "why should I have to..."
Click to expand...

I've had two Buck folding hunters confiscated by LEO on Daytona Runs back in the 70s. 4-1/8" blade, under your jacket= concealed. Started carrying a hatchet. Trimmed the blade to just under 4" at the edge to keep it legal. Should have seen the look on LEO's when I whipped that out. Course, spent some down time on the sidewalk.
Anyway. I can't get used to the idea of legal suppressors without a permit. Sorry. I like the idea of putting mics around cities that can pinpoint the location of gunshots in seconds. Guns are easy to get and soon, suppressors will be too. They'll be on alibaba or amazon.
Another reg on the chopping block is reporting persons who have been declared disabled for mental disability for the removal of firearms and ammunition. Apparently, the NRA feels and has fought the reg so that we should not confiscate firearms from mentally disabled persons unless a judge declares them unfit. I'm sorry. They voluntarily declared themselves unfit so they could get disability. Give back the money, we give back your guns.
 
trblmkr said:
I've had two Buck folding hunters confiscated by LEO on Daytona Runs back in the 70s. 4-1/8" blade, under your jacket= concealed. Started carrying a hatchet. Trimmed the blade to just under 4" at the edge to keep it legal. Should have seen the look on LEO's when I whipped that out. Course, spent some down time on the sidewalk.
Anyway. I can't get used to the idea of legal suppressors without a permit. Sorry. I like the idea of putting mics around cities that can pinpoint the location of gunshots in seconds. Guns are easy to get and soon, suppressors will be too. They'll be on alibaba or amazon.
Another reg on the chopping block is reporting persons who have been declared disabled for mental disability for the removal of firearms and ammunition. Apparently, the NRA feels and has fought the reg so that we should not confiscate firearms from mentally disabled persons unless a judge declares them unfit. I'm sorry. They voluntarily declared themselves unfit so they could get disability. Give back the money, we give back your guns.
Click to expand...

I guess I don't understand what you are saying here. Are you talking about the NRA issue where the VA tried to use PTSD as a reason to restrict gun ownership? How many people do you know that declared themselves unfit just so they could get disability? Were those military people? It sure would be good to get some clarification on that.
 
trblmkr said:
I've had two Buck folding hunters confiscated by LEO on Daytona Runs back in the 70s. 4-1/8" blade, under your jacket= concealed. Started carrying a hatchet. Trimmed the blade to just under 4" at the edge to keep it legal. Should have seen the look on LEO's when I whipped that out. Course, spent some down time on the sidewalk.
Anyway. I can't get used to the idea of legal suppressors without a permit. Sorry. I like the idea of putting mics around cities that can pinpoint the location of gunshots in seconds. Guns are easy to get and soon, suppressors will be too. They'll be on alibaba or amazon.
Another reg on the chopping block is reporting persons who have been declared disabled for mental disability for the removal of firearms and ammunition. Apparently, the NRA feels and has fought the reg so that we should not confiscate firearms from mentally disabled persons unless a judge declares them unfit. I'm sorry. They voluntarily declared themselves unfit so they could get disability. Give back the money, we give back your guns.
Click to expand...

I have a buddy who likes test law limits. He pulls the same kind of crap. Lol, gets the same results too.

I hadn't ever heard of the triangulating mics before. That's not a bad idea.

I get your stance on the disability issue. I think that sounds fair as well.

All right. Hate to say it. "Assualt weapons" Without getting into sear, fire rate, etc, BS. I am opposed. I have no problems with bolt action hunters, shotguns, and pistols. I'm talking receivers not furniture. I feel like if the original design was for the military it should stay there. Wanna shoot it? Join up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom