Election fraud

98cwitr said:

Registration leads to confiscation.

Click to expand...

I figured we'd get to that eventually. "I need my pretend army guns to protect myself against the government, but if the government knows I've got them they'll come and take them away and I won't be a be able to protect myself against the government."

essentialsaltes said:

Clinton didn't grab your guns. Obama didn't grab your guns. Biden won't either.

Now, election fraud is the subject of the OP.

Click to expand...

The Brady Bill had nothing to do with possession and had a grandfather clause. This bans possession unless the owner pays an additional tax to the ATF to register them. Why should anyone have to pay an additional tax for something they have a constitutional right to possess?

You're right, we are a bit off topic...not even sure why we have this post when there's the evidence thread. *shrug*

98cwitr said:

You're right, but I didn't say it "is," but I did say it "leads to it."

Click to expand...

What you said was that Biden and Harris proposed it, not proposed something else that you think might lead to it.

98cwitr said:

Any honest historian can tell you why the founding fathers enumerated the right [of the people] to keep and bear arms in the constitution, and it did have anything to do with "sporting"

Click to expand...

That is correct. It was about being an organized, legally constituted militia. The Militia Act of 1903, et seq. organized the National Guard as the designated state militias. So you should be able to take you rifle home between your service periods in the NG.

Hans Blaster said:

That is correct. It was about being an organized, legally constituted militia. The Militia Act of 1903, et seq. organized the National Guard as the designated state militias. So you should be able to take you rifle home between your service periods in the NG.

Click to expand...

Incorrect. You should read SCOTUS opinion and ruling on DC v. Heller (2008)

Anyway...we are quite OT and I will digress.

98cwitr said:

Any magazine over 10 rounds, which most semi-auto pistols have, would come into scope here.

Regardless, this is completely unconstitutional. Registration leads to confiscation. We have inalienable rights and this is a blatant infringement on those rights if implemented. Any honest historian can tell you why the founding fathers enumerated the right [of the people] to keep and bear arms in the constitution, and it did have anything to do with "sporting"

Click to expand...

Actual courts have ruled otherwise.

98cwitr said:

Registration leads to confiscation.

Click to expand...

Ehhhh. I don't think so. How long have guns been registered in many jurisdictions? Seems like a long time. I can remember back to the 80s when I thought *all* guns were registered/licensed because the TV cops were always chatting on about the registration of any gun they encountered and because my friends talked about getting their guns registered/licensed not to mention the mandatory safety training they need to use them in the way they saw fit.

"Registration leads to confiscation." is a paranoid fantasy fed to you by the NRA and certain other organizations because they want to you stand with them against their opponents.

98cwitr said:

Incorrect. You should read SCOTUS opinion and ruling on DC v. Heller (2008)

Click to expand...

I happen to think SCOTUS was off their nut on that decision (and a few others).

I do think that "self-defense" is one (or part of one) of those basic natural human rights (like the right of conscious and expression, etc.) and from that complete bans on weapons for self-defense purposes would not be valid, but that doesn't fit with in the well-organized militia doctrine of the 2nd Amendment. It also doesn't prohibit (nor frankly would the 2nd Amd path) registration and safety training.

98cwitr said:

You're right, but I didn't say it "is," but I did say it "leads to it."

Click to expand...

98cwitr said:

It goes further...according to the campaign's own website, they're banning possession as well:

Click to expand...

So.... Any election fraud?

gaara4158 said:

You’re probably not aware of this, but “liberal” and “leftist” mean two very different things.

Click to expand...

I'd rather that you not start your presentation by insulting me.

nHarris is nowhere near as far left as Bernie and AOC, despite certain arbitrary metrics placing her to their left.

Click to expand...

That's false. She may not be quite as far over as those two, but she's close and certainly is not a typical liberal. So, okay, now we have that straight.

essentialsaltes said:

So.... Any election fraud?

Click to expand...

Much rather track that in the "evidence" thread. I will retire from this one now

essentialsaltes said:

So.... Any election fraud?

Click to expand...

They are sitting on the claims that would hold up in court until later on for...reasons.

Belk said:

The most liberal voting record according to whom?

Click to expand...

This is what the Washington Post (undeniably one of the most influential mouthpieces for the left these days):

The Trump campaign has launched an attack against Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) that doesn’t quite ring true to most ears, but is also technically backed up by data: In 2019, she was ranked the most liberal U.S. senator.

Click to expand...

That’s according to the nonpartisan, independent congressional tracker GovTrack.us.

Click to expand...

And CNN (!), in its predictable effort to refute the charge that she is the most liberal, called her "one of the most liberal Senators."

And that's despite the ranking given in the survey referred to above in which her voting record put her dead last.

98cwitr said:

Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes.

Click to expand...

Who knew?

Albion said:

This is what the Washington Post (undeniably one of the most influential mouthpieces for the left these days):



And CNN (!), in its predicatable effort to refute the charge that she is the most liberal, called her "one of the most liberal Senators." And that's despite the ranking given in the survey referred to above in which her voting record put her dead last.

Click to expand...

So not according to the Washington Post, but according to GovTrack.US. Thank you.

Belk said:

So not according to the Washington Post, but according to GovTrack.US. Thank you.

Click to expand...

And according to CNN.

Now tell me that CNN and the Washington Post as well as GovTrack.US are right wing news services not worthy of being given an ounce of trust.

Albion said:

And according to CNN.

Now tell me that CNN and the Washington Post as well as GovTrack.US are right wing news services not worthy of being given an ounce of trust.

Click to expand...

Why would you want news sources to be "right wing" or "left wing". Personally, I prefer fact based news.

Hans Blaster said:

Why would you want news sources to be "right wing" or "left wing".

Click to expand...

I don't.

Albion said:

And according to CNN.

Now tell me that CNN and the Washington Post as well as GovTrack.US are right wing news services not worthy of being given an ounce of trust.

Click to expand...

I don't know that I agree with the assessment but I agree the source is non partisan and they publish their methodology in case anyone wants to dispute it so no complaints from me. Thanks Albion.

Albion said:

I'd rather that you not start your presentation by insulting me.

Click to expand...

You use the two terms interchangeably. It wasn’t an uncharitable assumption.

Albion said:

That's false. She may not be quite as far over as those two, but she's close and certainly is not a typical liberal. So, okay, now we have that straight.

Click to expand...

I’ve already explained why this is not the case over the course of multiple posts. You’re going to have to come up with something that goes beyond “nuh-uhh” if you still insist on contradicting me.