Biden Tracker (4 Viewers)

[Farb]

For all the things related to the Biden/Harris Administration and their latest hits and misses

https://www.dailywire.com/news/whit...gedly-sexually-harassing-threatening-reporter

Interesting story, looks like 'only the best people' didn't stop with the new administration.

 

[FullMonte]

He also reflects on his father.

How so?

 

[FullMonte]

I would love to the see the US actually have zero regulation on fire arms, but fire arms are regulated for legal and law abiding citizens.

Just for clarification...are you saying that you think it's ok if someone is charged with a violent gun crime, but pleads guilty in exchange for probation.....and that individual walks out of the courthouse and purchases a gun legally from a gun store?

 

[nolaspe]

He wrote a book? Why?

For the same reason drumpfy jr wrote a book too... $$$

 

[Farb]

Just for clarification...are you saying that you think it's ok if someone is charged with a violent gun crime, but pleads guilty in exchange for probation.....and that individual walks out of the courthouse and purchases a gun legally from a gun store?

No. Guilty of a felony you don't get to own a weapon or vote. Forever.

 

[samiam5211]

I would love to the see the US actually have zero regulation on fire arms, but fire arms are regulated for legal and law abiding citizens.

All laws regulate the law-abiding.

 

[nolaspe]

Dr. Biden bringing some sweet shade...

 

[coldseat]

The mythical archetype of the "Law-abiding gun owner" has to die before any progress can be made on gun laws. Just because somebody is obeying the law on day and owns a gun, doesn't mean that they won't use that gun in an illegal way the next day. Purchasing a gun legeally isn't some litmus test for a law-abiding citizen. That same person can walk out of that gun shop and use that gun illegally, and we've seen that happen many times now.

 

[samiam5211]

The mythical archetype of the "Law-abiding gun owner" has to die before any progress can be made on gun laws. Just because somebody is obeying the law on day and owns a gun, doesn't mean that they won't use that gun in an illegal way the next day. Purchasing a gun legeally isn't some litmus test for a law-abiding citizen. That same person can walk out of that gun shop and use that gun illegally, and we've seen that happen many times now.

Guns used illegally through no fault of it's own = not the guns fault.

Child brought to the US illegally through no fault of their own = send the illegal human back to where they came from.

 

[Farb]

The mythical archetype of the "Law-abiding gun owner" has to die before any progress can be made on gun laws. Just because somebody is obeying the law on day and owns a gun, doesn't mean that they won't use that gun in an illegal way the next day. Purchasing a gun legeally isn't some litmus test for a law-abiding citizen. That same person can walk out of that gun shop and use that gun illegally, and we've seen that happen many times now.

Wait. You mean to tell me that humans have free will? There was and is a large influx of that mythical archetype in the last year and a lot more on the democratic side. Although they tend to be more like a Baptist in the liquor store when it comes to guns.

Just about anything can be purchased and then used in an illegal way doesn't make the item illegal. The act is illegal.

 

[coldseat]

Wait. You mean to tell me that humans have free will? There was and is a large influx of that mythical archetype in the last year and a lot more on the democratic side. Although they tend to be more like a Baptist in the liquor store when it comes to guns.

Just about anything can be purchased and then used in an illegal way doesn't make the item illegal. The act is illegal.

That doesn't mean that those items shouldn't be regulated because of the carnage they can cause in the wrong hand. Why can you see that?

 

[DaveXA]

That doesn't mean that those items shouldn't be regulated because of the carnage they can cause in the wrong hand. Why can you see that?

Sure, but they are regulated somewhat. SCOTUS even ruled that DC's gun restrictions were Constitutional if I recall correctly. I think there needs to be some better safeguards, but not necessarily excessive regs.

 

[Farb]

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-clashes-cnn-reporter-summit-193123642.html

I remember when this was assault on the free press a year or 2 ago.

 

[Farb]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/new...ntities-off-limits-to-cyberattacks/ar-AAL7rC4

So, if they are not on the list, Putin can do as he wishes? Strange strategy.

 

[samiam5211]

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-clashes-cnn-reporter-summit-193123642.html

I remember when this was assault on the free press a year or 2 ago.

Yea, he shouldn't have lost his cool there.

He did apologize hours later.

He apologized for it, and it wasn't even in the same ballpark as the crap Trump pulled. So it's not apples to apples, and Biden apologized, so it is miles better than the crap that was going on two years ago.

Nice Try though.

 

[superchuck500]

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-clashes-cnn-reporter-summit-193123642.html

I remember when this was assault on the free press a year or 2 ago.

You can't be serious. Trump called the media "the enemy of the people", advocated for reversing the Sullivan libel standard, and secretly subpoenaed journalist phone and email records relating to their coverage of the Russia investigation. The Trump Campaign sued the NYT and other outlets.

You can't normalize that behavior. Biden's comment (that he later apologized for) isn't anything like what Trump did, fundamentally.

 

[MT15]

False equivalency is the only kind used anymore.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

False equivalency is the only kind used anymore.

Don't forget about the Soviet level of "whataboutism" employed by "republican conservatives" these days.

 

[Saintman2884]

Sure, but they are regulated somewhat. SCOTUS even ruled that DC's gun restrictions were Constitutional if I recall correctly. I think there needs to be some better safeguards, but not necessarily excessive regs.

Excessively regs meaning UK or EU-styled gun control laws which, if applied recklessly, or too aggressively, might run afoul of the 4th Amendment illegal search and seizures. Some progressives might admit it, some won't but Ive always suspected a good portion of their "wet dream" concepts of gun control is extremely strict European gun control laws which are rigid, excessive, in some cases like France in their legal system where they dont need a warrant to arrest someone or do a police search of someone's home on probable cause if some homeowner is suspected of possessing a sharp steak knife. Some of UK's and EU's gun control laws seem, IMHO, almost semi-authoritatian in their rigid ness, and enforcement.

I know about the history of gun control and the underlining reasons behind the philosophes inspiring most EU nations gun control laws and it has nothing to do with ensuring public safety and its still largely the cumulative effects of centuries of religious, political and economic elitist-centered or authoritian/totalitarian regimes regulating and enacting laws to prevent or stifle potential political unrest, industrial revolutions, or successful long-term, meaningful popular revolutions. In medieval Europe, it was actually illegal for serfs, commoners to own or possess a knife, sword or stabbing weapon to protect themselves from thieves, or robbers looking to rob or kill them or their families.