If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
lets just say someone gives trump a heart attack, bush has a lot of money in the bank to run a campaign and has the GOP behind him.He is irrelevant. He can believe in unicorns and he is not getting the nomination.
He is irrelevant. He can believe in unicorns and he is not getting the nomination.
I'm no Bush fan, but he specifically said " there needs to be a hearing". How is that unreasonable? He didn't say take all their guns and then maybe in X years, and XX appearances in court he can have them back after.
Lets say you see you're neighbor of 15 years mental health start to deteriorate for one reason or another. You're friends with the guy, you've been to the shooting range with him for many years, your kids grew up together, but he's started acting... strange. Maybe one day he does or says something that makes you think he's going to hurt himself or others. Shouldn't there be a way to get that guy in front of a doctor and a judge to determine if he IS going to do something dangerous? That's pretty much the exact scenario of the guy that killed those two people on live TV. BUT that doesn't mean the cops show up on the dude's door step and take all his guns without a hearing. Because we all know their are fraudulent reports by people with a grudge.
As responsible gun owners we need to find common ground to deal with the mental health issues that have caused some of the recent shootings carried out by people who PASSED background checks and bought their guns LEGALLY.
I don't trust the gov't setting a standard like that to take peoples rights. Look at MA. The chiefs have the absolute power to deny an LTC for any reason they want. No thanks.
This is essentially the GOP's election to lose.
So the guy that everyone thinks is crazy and is going to hurt someone, passes a background check, buys a gun legally, and then kills two people on TV. Because there is no system to identify and evaluate crazy people. Everyone here is ok with that?
We're not talking about a gang banger buying an illegal gun, this dude when through all the same checks you all go through when you buy a gun. Again, you're all ok with that?
OK with what? That 2 people were murdered? No. That the victims were apparently unarmed and unaware? No. That the murderer killed himself last instead of first? No.So the guy that everyone thinks is crazy and is going to hurt someone, passes a background check, buys a gun legally, and then kills two people on TV. Because there is no system to identify and evaluate crazy people. Everyone here is ok with that?
We're not talking about a gang banger buying an illegal gun, this dude when through all the same checks you all go through when you buy a gun. Again, you're all ok with that?
That's what the campaigning, primary, and convention process is all about, and we are still very, very early in it. Anointing anyone now is IMNSHO way too soon.I am not a Jeb. supporter, and I could see all the anxieties about Jeb's comment, or any candidate's comment about a certain issue. As
Should we win the war or a battle?
Would we be in a better place (less probability of tighter gun control, etc) if Hillary Clinton or a democrat wins if we do not unify together to nominate a winning candidate?
I'm no Bush fan, but he specifically said " there needs to be a hearing". How is that unreasonable? He didn't say take all their guns and then maybe in X years, and XX appearances in court he can have them back after.
Lets say you see you're neighbor of 15 years mental health start to deteriorate for one reason or another. You're friends with the guy, you've been to the shooting range with him for many years, your kids grew up together, but he's started acting... strange. Maybe one day he does or says something that makes you think he's going to hurt himself or others. Shouldn't there be a way to get that guy in front of a doctor and a judge to determine if he IS going to do something dangerous? That's pretty much the exact scenario of the guy that killed those two people on live TV. BUT that doesn't mean the cops show up on the dude's door step and take all his guns without a hearing. Because we all know their are fraudulent reports by people with a grudge.
As responsible gun owners we need to find common ground to deal with the mental health issues that have caused some of the recent shootings carried out by people who PASSED background checks and bought their guns LEGALLY.
So the guy that everyone thinks is crazy and is going to hurt someone, passes a background check, buys a gun legally, and then kills two people on TV. Because there is no system to identify and evaluate crazy people. Everyone here is ok with that?
We're not talking about a gang banger buying an illegal gun, this dude when through all the same checks you all go through when you buy a gun. Again, you're all ok with that?
So the guy that everyone thinks is crazy and is going to hurt someone, passes a background check, buys a gun legally, and then kills two people on TV. Because there is no system to identify and evaluate crazy people. Everyone here is ok with that?
We're not talking about a gang banger buying an illegal gun, this dude when through all the same checks you all go through when you buy a gun. Again, you're all ok with that?
You don't give government power and hope it only uses it for good. Why? BECAUSE THAT NEVER HAPPENS.
I'll take the risk of dealing with a crazy person, over the government having the authority to have a gang point guns at me, steal me property and kidnap me all on other peoples word that I'm "crazy".