Here come the Biden gun control EOs...

[Tombs]

Where did he fail, where it is expected Biden will be successful? It’s an honest question. What barrier did he face that prevents him from taking action, especially after having been re-elected?

Republicans held the house during the push for gunbans. Democrats also lacked a sufficient majority in the senate to push through legislation, because back then decency still existed and only the rare bill would be passed via nuclear option.

 

[tbhausen]

Admittedly I've never used one, so I can't speak with any experience. From what I've read about a bump-stock, which mostly came in the wake of the LAS shooting. They do enable you to rapidly fire, but also make the gun highly inaccurate. If what I've read is accurate, your "suppressing fire" scenario will likely lead to you shooting your neighbor, a family member, or law enforcement and maybe some rioters too.
Moding an AR with a bump-stock to turn it into a cartoon gun and fires a lot of rounds randomly seems irresponsible.

So again, I'm asking if someone can provide a practical reason for a bump-stock. Allowing someone to wildly dispense ammo rapidly is not a practical reason in my book.

Does “because it’s fun” meet your standard of practicality? Should we start listing other fun things that people would consider “impractical”?

Edit: after catching up on the thread, I see we already did.

 

[BigRed]

 

[IndyDave1776]

Does “because it’s fun” meet your standard of practicality? Should we start listing other fun things that people would consider “impractical”?

In my reckoning a bump stock is as useless as mammaries on a boar. I do not see my nonperception of utility justifying a ban. The government of a free people should NOT be in the business of banning things. The closest I can get to conceding anything is that the incident happened before Trump had reigned in the establishment Republicans and couldn't really afford the battle it would have brought. Disgusting as any infringement, no matter how much utility it does or does not have, is, I would have had a hard time giving up the economic, border security, and foreign trade benefits that almost certainly would not have happened had Trump made bumpstocks his hill to dump political capital on.

 

[mike8170]

That’s one heck of a leap. I haven’t heard anything about him killing anybody. I don’t know if he even fired a shot. Simply being at Waco doesn’t confirm you accusations. He was a member of the ATF. He was assuredly direct to be there. Unless he was involved in the planning and implementation of that event, your argument doesn’t hold weight.

Just jumped back in this thread, and guess what, IT DOESN'T ****ING MATTER!!!!! I have seen grunts got to Leavenworth for posing with Hadji bodies. This **** posed with the bodies of UNITED STATES CITIZENS that MAY have not paid a ****ing Unconstitutional tax.

 

[Maximinus Thrax]

So the reasoning I'm seeing for a bump stock is "because." That's a terrible reason to advocate for (or against) something.

No, that's the reason you want to see and if you agree to "compromise" with those who hate you and let them ban a piece of plastic, then your other pieces of metal and plastic will follow. It may not happen tomorrow, but it will eventually come. Whether you personally find it practical or useful is irrelevant. I guarantee I could walk through your own home and find a truckload of things that I think serve no practical use but you find enjoyable. Should I advocate for them to be banned or stand aside while others take them from you?

I advocate for bump stocks not because I think they serve practical purpose. Quite the opposite in fact. Having actually used one I find no reason for them in my inventory but standing my ground here will prevent me from having to stand my ground on something I do find useful or enjoyable later. Many Republicans don't seem to grasp this concept. I promise you that Blue team understands it perfectly.

 

[Hawkeye]

That's because most here believe the mantra, "some here voted for it".

If a vote is cast for Biden, then that person, by definition, supports everything Biden does.

Sometimes a mantra is a reflection of reality.

 

[Hawkeye]

...500K COVID deaths due to inept policies, massive unemployment, massive increase in debt, loss of world leadership, more powerful Russia, N.Korea, China, massive administrative exits due to corruption, insurrection, failure to secure elections(Lol), trade war, etc, etc, etc...

You taking the blame for all that?

Waddaboutism and attempted deflection.

 

[Hawkeye]

Really who was president when the Spanish flu hit the United States? Was he held responsible for a virus that no one can stop? Just stop with that stupidity. No person can stop s virus. If so who so we blame for Aids/HIV, the Flu, the Swine Flu etc etc. That is absolutely stupid imo to blame a person for a virus. Except maybe the Chinese who made it and brought it to the United States as a biological weapon.

Oh so you are calling the "protests" massive insurrection now. Interesting. Actually he can't stop a protest unless the governor of the state allows him to do so. That's on you Democrats.

Russia NK China are more powerful because we have a weak leader in office now.

BUt but but... ORANGEMAN BAAAAAD! He's overweight, old, white and posts mean tweets! TDS still exists.

 

[Hawkeye]

Trump didn't run on gun control.

Biden did, as a focal point of his campaign. He's doing exactly what his voters asked him to do.

Nononono! there are those on here who will tell you that Biden did NOT run on gun control. And they will do that with a straight face. they are either pathetically gullible or dangerously disingenuous.

 

[Hawkeye]

Youre right, Trump didn’t run on gun control. He ran explicitly against it, and then smack ya’ll in the face.

Gee, I thought Biden won the election and is the POTUS proposing EO's that violate the Constitution. Maybe you live in an alternate reality?

 

[Hawkeye]

So you’d rather Biden have lied to you about gun control, and then do the opposite? Ok gotcha. Trump took an action, by banning guns that I’d say was beyond the scope of his powers; exhibited by it being struck down. I’m not so sure that Biden’s suggestions go that far.

Whaddaboutism again. I thought this thread was about Biden?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Just jumped back in this thread, and guess what, IT DOESN'T ****ING MATTER!!!!! I have seen grunts got to Leavenworth for posing with Hadji bodies. This **** posed with the bodies of UNITED STATES CITIZENS that MAY have not paid a ****ing Unconstitutional tax.

I doubt I have to tell you, but the UCMJ ain’t like a civilian courtroom.

 

[Thor]

Deflection, disinformation, wraslin' in the pig pit. Y'all have fun feeding the trolls.

But hey, Joe's not coming for you guns. The senile socialist chinese sock puppet supporters all told us so. May they rot in a place very warm.

 

[KG1]

Question for all you Biden voters. If Biden doesn't withdraw Chipman's nomination in light of his nominee's depraved Waco photo-op then what's that say about the character of your President?

Don't deflect or whatabout now. Just answer the damn question.

 

[foszoe]

Gee, I thought Biden won the election and is the POTUS proposing EO's that violate the Constitution. Maybe you live in an alternate reality?

Congratulations on accepting the Biden victory. Many haven't managed that yet.

Acceptance is one of the steps.

 

[foszoe]

Question for all you Biden voters. If Biden doesn't withdraw Chipman's nomination in light of his nominee's depraved Waco photo-op then what's that say about the character of your President?

Don't deflect or whatabout now. Just answer the damn question.

Did the photo recently come to light?

Point being, I would like to know if the vetting committee saw the photo and if so, how they figured that it would be ok?

 

[KG1]

Did the photo recently come to light?

Point being, I would like to know if the vetting committee saw the photo and if so, how they figured that it would be ok?

We'll see what happens. I already question Biden's character. This should never even get to a Senate confirmation hearing let alone a vote. Someone in his circle of influence must surely be aware of it by now if not Biden himself.

The longer this goes on the more I call it into question.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Question for all you Biden voters. If Biden doesn't withdraw Chipman's nomination in light of his nominee's depraved Waco photo-op then what's that say about the character of your President?

Don't deflect or whatabout now. Just answer the damn question.

If Biden doesn't withdraw, I would consider that low character. It would bother me...

..."If" the guy in the picture is Chipman......because I'm starting to wonder if that's even him in the photo. Chipman has a unique set of ears. The guy in the pic doesn't appear to have those. Chipman was ATF. Damn near ALL the ATF guys at Waco were wearing blue BDU pants and shirts. There were some that were wearing camo pants, but they ALL had blue shirts. You know who did have on full camo at Waco? The FBI. Funny enough, out of all the people that I've seen, who posed in that spot (because multiple people apparently did), "Chipman" is apparently the only non-FBI guy who does.

So since I answered your question, it's only fair that you answer mine. How confident are you that the person in the pic is Chipman?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Congratulations on accepting the Biden victory. Many haven't managed that yet.

Acceptance is one of the steps.

Accepting that Biden presently holds the office and accepting that hd acquired the position legally are two entirely different concepts.