Tim Walz Said He Wants To Ban Guns He ‘Carried in War.’ He Never Saw Combat.

[Bradskii]

This is what I find utterly ridiculous. Even if he's talking about weapons that other people carried in the war.

He was making a speech. Not giving a lecture on weaponry for heaven's sake. He's an expert marksman - he probably knows a lot more about guns than you do. Do you expect him to ramble on about the specific types of guns used in combat zones and note the differences between a civilian AR-15 and an M40 (a variant of the AR-15)?

And note that the AR-15 was the one of the weapons used in the Las Vegas massacre. He also used an AR-10 which is still in military use. So please, give us all a break from the pedantry.

 

[Hazelelponi]

He was making a speech. Not giving a lecture on weaponry for heaven's sake. He's an expert marksman - he probably knows a lot more about guns than you do. Do you expect him to ramble on about the specific types of guns used in combat zones and note the differences between a civilian AR-15 and an M40 (a variant of the AR-15)?

And note that the AR-15 was the one of the weapons used in the Las Vegas massacre. He also used an AR-10 which is still in military use. So please, give us all a break from the pedantry.

He was pandering to a crowd and treated them like they were imbeciles.

It rather shows you what he thinks of you.

 

[Bradskii]

He was pandering to a crowd and treated them like they were imbeciles.

It's the people who are spreading this...ordure who are treating you as if you were an imbecile. The guy was making a promise to help improve gun laws. I mean, the guy isn't blowing smoke. He's about as genuine on this matter as he could possibly be, to the point of donating the donations he received from the NRA to a charity connected to the Las Vegas massacre.

Now you might not like what he wants to do. But trying to nitpick the type of weapons he used or the army was using when he referred to those type of guns needing to be controlled is preposterous.

 

[Hazelelponi]

It's the people who are spreading this...ordure who are treating you as if you were an imbecile. The guy was making a promise to help improve gun laws. I mean, the guy isn't blowing smoke. He's about as genuine on this matter as he could possibly be, to the point of donating the donations he received from the NRA to a charity connected to the Las Vegas massacre.

Now you might not like what he wants to do. But trying to nitpick the type of weapons he used or the army was using when he referred to those type of guns needing to be controlled is preposterous.

He wasn't doing that.

He might have committed a crime by claiming he carried weapons in war (remember he said weapons he carried in war) which is claiming to be a combat veteran in order to seem more impressive than he is.

And then, instead of an actual policy proposal "I will work with Congress to ban x real gun, it's a core part of our policy agenda" he promises to ban guns that are already illegal. .

This is a guy running a popularity contest, not a political campaign, and he's laying down a bed of lies, serious ones at that.

 

[Bradskii]

He wasn't doing that.

You don't want to think he was doing that. It's plainly obvious that you'll accept any nonsense that's posted about the guy as long as it's negative. If this guy was a Republican then you'd be singing his praises, quoting his service record and making the same obvious points in support of him as I've been.

This is par for the course in the forum. And it's so blatant. I swear that if most people on the right posting here had no idea who this guy was and all the details were given except his politics and they were asked if they thought he'd be a good candidate for VP they wouldn't answer. They would demand to know whose VP he was going to before they could. Heaven forbid that they say he sounds like a great guy and then find out he's a Democrat. Perish the thought!

We see it in every thread.

 

[Valletta]

While Walz could have worded his statement a little better, nothing he said was inaccurate.

"I spent 25 years in the Army, and I hunt. I’ve been voting for common-sense legislation that protects the Second Amendment, but we can do background checks. We can research the impacts of gun violence. We can make sure those weapons of war that I carried in war are only carried in war."

Walz never claimed that he saw combat; however, he did serve during wartime and was deployed to Europe in a support role during Operation Enduring Freedom. This, by definition, makes Walz a war veteran.

A "war veteran" is defined as someone who was deployed to foreign waters or soils by any branch of the U.S. armed forces to participate in direct or support activities against a U.S. enemy.


Attacking someone running for office who served honorably in the US military and later served on the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee fighting for veterans's rights and benefits is a losing strategy.

Just pointing out the inaccuracy of his statement and my opinion that it will force him off of the ticket. Maybe not, we'll see.

 

[Valletta]

By dishonoring Walz' 24 (!) years in the National Guard, the Trump campaign is dishonoring all Guard members, past and present, who made sacrifices for our country.
Twenty-four years is a long, long time. Guard members will be turned off, I'm sure, by two disgruntled former colleagues to cast shade on him.
I know the NRA will throw everything they can at him for his gun reforms in Minnesota.
How many politicians have had the class and integrity after changing their beliefs on background checks and assault weapons to return every campaign contribution they'd ever gotten from the NRA?
His very existence--a politician who broke from the NRA and not only succeeded but thrives, worries them.
How can they keep all their other little mouthpieces in line, voting their way, if Walz has shown them they can throw off those shackles and get reelected?

It's not a matter of dishonoring anyone, it's a matter of a false statement. Note what CNN has to say:

Tim Walz’s Claim He Carried Weapons in War ‘Absolutely False’: CNN​

CNN Backs Vance Claim That Walz Did Not Carry Weapons ‘in War’

The assault on Tim Walz’s military record has similarities with the effective GOP ‘swift boat’ campaign against Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[RileyG]

I'm already getting tired of him.

 

[Fantine]

I'm getting tired of his accusers.
We all forget the most important fact in this ridiculously overblown expose.

And that is that Gov. Walz learned that military weapons have absolutely no place in civilian situations. And due to his correctly formed conscience, he took steps to make the third happiest and 5th most business friendly state in the country the safest!

I kind of wish he could still be president of the governor's association and share his wisdom and values with other governors.

 

[RileyG]

I'm getting tired of his accusers.
We all forget the most important fact in this ridiculously overblown expose.

And that is that Gov. Walz learned that military weapons have absolutely no place in civilian situations. And due to his correctly formed conscience, he took steps to make the third happiest and 5th most business friendly state in the country the safest!

I kind of wish he could still be president of the governor's association and share his wisdom and values with other governors.

Fair enough.

Take care

 

[BPPLEE]

You don't want to think he was doing that. It's plainly obvious that you'll accept any nonsense that's posted about the guy as long as it's negative. If this guy was a Republican then you'd be singing his praises, quoting his service record and making the same obvious points in support of him as I've been.

This is par for the course in the forum. And it's so blatant. I swear that if most people on the right posting here had no idea who this guy was and all the details were given except his politics and they were asked if they thought he'd be a good candidate for VP they wouldn't answer. They would demand to know whose VP he was going to before they could. Heaven forbid that they say he sounds like a great guy and then find out he's a Democrat. Perish the thought!

We see it in every thread.

That’s the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Tim Walz Said He Wants To Ban Guns He ‘Carried in War.’ He Never Saw Combat.

Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz claimed to have carried guns "in war" during his career in the Army National Guard, according to a video released by the Kamala Harris campaign Tuesday. There’s one glaring problem with his claim.

freebeacon.com

This will finish him.

I doubt it. While he was not in combat, he certainly was trained with and carried the weapon.

 

[Valletta]

I'm getting tired of his accusers.
We all forget the most important fact in this ridiculously overblown expose.

And that is that Gov. Walz learned that military weapons have absolutely no place in civilian situations. And due to his correctly formed conscience, he took steps to make the third happiest and 5th most business friendly state in the country the safest!

I kind of wish he could still be president of the governor's association and share his wisdom and values with other governors.

Minnesota ranks 44th out of 50 on State Business Tax Climate Index

These were some of the headlines in local media in July, when CNBC released its annual “America’s Top States for Business” ranking: "Minnesota ranks...

www.americanexperiment.org

Gov. Tim Walz accused of ‘massive overreach’ as VP pick’s COVID record slammed by critics: ‘Complete and utter failure’

Walz, 60, was one of several Democratic governors accused of “massive overreach” in wielding executive power to shutter schools, businesses and churches during the once-in-a-generation pandemic.…

nypost.com

How Kamala Harris and Tim Walz fiddled as Minneapolis burned during destructive 2020 BLM riots

As his state’s largest city was engulfed in flames, Gov. Walz held off on mobilizing the Minnesota National Guard for a full 18 hours.

nypost.com

Walz has been a disaster. He and the mayor of Minneapolis let a portion of the city be destroyed and set the tone for the following crime wave.

 

[Fantine]

The tax foundation focuses on tax rates--period.

The other studies looked at a variety of factors.

Imagine how many future riots will be diminished in Minnesota, where rogue murderous police officers are held accountable for their crimes, where steps are taken to foster better community/police relations.

Imagine how much safer black people driving and on the streets will feel knowing that Minnesota takes racism and profiling seriously.

 

[Bradskii]

That’s the pot calling the kettle black.

I've already stated that I'd class this guy as impressive whatever his politics. His service record, his service to the people of his state, his ability to change his mind when presented with the facts, he's a family man, his integrity, he's very well spoken, whip smart...he's a guy I'd meet up with for a beer. I could name a couple on the Republican side such as the late McCain and possibly Romney. Even Bush.

He reminds me a lot of my son's father-in-law. He did his time in Vietnam (still mad at Uncle Sam - the Australians will recognise the wording there). He was a teacher (maths professor), a country boy and salt of the earth type of guy. We get on like a house on fire. But...it wasn't long after we first met that we realised that he is as far right as I am left. So we avoid talking politics. But I respect his views and he respects mine. To the point where we can have a little dig at each other on a political matter but take it in good spirit.

So where is that in US politics right now? Where are those who will cross the divide and work together? Where are those who can determine a common cause?

 

[JosephZ]

Walz has been a disaster. He and the mayor of Minneapolis let a portion of the city be destroyed and set the tone for the following crime wave.

"He [Walz] is an excellent guy. You've got a big National Guard out there that's ready to come in and fight like hell. I tell you, the best — what they did in Minneapolis was incredible. They went in and dominated, and it happened immediately." -- Donald Trump

 

[Valletta]

"He [Walz] is an excellent guy. You've got a big National Guard out there that's ready to come in and fight like hell. I tell you, the best — what they did in Minneapolis was incredible. They went in and dominated, and it happened immediately." -- Donald Trump

While Walz eventually brought in the National Guard as he should of, he should have acted earlier. Too bad Trump didn't know all of the details. Mayor Frey had a conversation with Walz on the 27th, where Frey asked Walz for the National Guard. Walz told Frey he would consider it. When it didn't happen, the next morning, the 28th, Frey's office sent a written request. The St. Paul mayor's office also sent in a written request. Finally Walz activated the National Guard in the afternoon. Later Trump did call Walz and said the military would support the National Guard--Trump was one hundred percent supportive of Walz using the National Guard.

 

[Bradskii]

While Walz eventually brought in the National Guard as he should of, he should have acted earlier. Too bad Trump didn't know all of the details. Mayor Frey had a conversation with Walz on the 27th, where Frey asked Walz for the National Guard. Walz told Frey he would consider it. When it didn't happen, the next morning, the 28th, Frey's office sent a written request. The St. Paul mayor's office also sent in a written request. Finally Walz activated the National Guard in the afternoon. Later Trump did call Walz and said the military would support the National Guard--Trump was one hundred percent supportive of Walz using the National Guard.

You don't put armed soldiers on the street at the drop of a hat, just after a chat. There's no way I'd do it without some serious discussions, some advice from military experts and police and working out the logistics. How many would be required. What will they specifically be used for. What are their standing orders. Where will they come from. Where will they stay. How are they fed. What is the chain of command. How long will they be needed. Can they detain people. Plus I'd need a written request. If he'd have held back for a week there might have been an argument that he should have acted earlier. He acted on the same day.

You guys are living in some alternative reality.

 

[Valletta]

You don't put armed soldiers on the street at the drop of a hat, just after a chat. There's no way I'd do it without some serious discussions, some advice from military experts and police and working out the logistics. How many would be required. What will they specifically be used for. What are their standing orders. Where will they come from. Where will they stay. How are they fed. What is the chain of command. How long will they be needed. Can they detain people. Plus I'd need a written request. If he'd have held back for a week there might have been an argument that he should have acted earlier. He acted on the same day.

You guys are living in some alternative reality.

I wish you would have given such testimony to the January 6th committee that went after Trump.

 

[Belk]

Tim Walz Said He Wants To Ban Guns He ‘Carried in War.’ He Never Saw Combat.

Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz claimed to have carried guns "in war" during his career in the Army National Guard, according to a video released by the Kamala Harris campaign Tuesday. There’s one glaring problem with his claim.

freebeacon.com

This will finish him.

I, also, am a combat veteran who never saw combat. What does being in combat have to do with carrying arms? I was in an active war zone and carried a rifle when appropriate.

I'm finding these continued attacks on a military man for political expediency a bit hypocritical.