Biden Tracker (2 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.

 

[JRad]

Would anyone here trust Joe Biden in his current state to manage your household finances or pick up your kids from school and drive them home?

Would you let a Zookeeper manage your stock portfolio?

 

[SaintForLife]

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

There is a reason that 100% of all tyrannical governments openly supports and advances the disarm of the population.

Maybe this had some merit in the 19th Century, but the current U.S. military would utterly steamroll an 'armed' citizenry -- assuming that citizenry has no access to tactical nukes, stealth bombers, etc. (which they don't because you won't find many right wingers who would interpret the 2nd Amendment in that way).

You can no longer argue the 2nd Amendment is a pragmatic deterrent against an authoritarian government. It defies common sense. Yet another example of how the Constitution is a relic, frozen in time and often bereft of logic when applied today. And, bizarrely, most on the right are enthralled with the idea of a strong military. The stronger it is, the easier it can suppress the citizenry.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

Maybe this had some merit in the 19th Century, but the current U.S. military would utterly steamroll an 'armed' citizenry -- assuming that citizenry has no access to tactical nukes, stealth bombers, etc. (which they don't because you won't find many right wingers who would interpret the 2nd Amendment in that way).

You can no longer argue the 2nd Amendment is a pragmatic deterrent against an authoritarian government. It defies common sense. Yet another example of how the Constitution is a relic, frozen in time and often bereft of logic when applied today. And, bizarrely, most on the right are enthralled with the idea of a strong military. The stronger it is, the easier it can suppress the citizenry.

The US Military could steamroll armed citizens if they tried to fight them conventionally (although the military rank and file would refuse the order). However, the military has proven much less effective at crushing armed insurrections. Look at Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. An armed citizenry with knowledge of the terrain, able to blend in, and willing to hit and run would be a problem for years.

It's all a moot point because unless we go full fascist, which is a realistic possibility for the first time since the mid-1800's, you just aren't going to see the citizens of the United States needing to defend themselves from our government on a large scale.

 

[DaveXA]

The US Military could steamroll armed citizens if they tried to fight them conventionally (although the military rank and file would refuse the order). However, the military has proven much less effective and crushing armed insurrections. Look at Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. An armed citizenry with knowledge of the terrain, able to blend in, and willing to hit and run would be a problem for years.

It's all a moot point because unless we go full fascist, which is a realistic possibility for the first time since the mid-1800's, you just aren't going to see the citizens of the United States needing to defend themselves from our government on a large scale.

Not only that, but there are enough citizens out there who are former military and know their tactics and how to counter them in a variety of combat scenarios, whether urban or in uninhabited settings. It would really depend on the size, scope and commitment of those who would actually attempt to defend themselves.

Hopefully, we don't ever get that far though.

 

[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.

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

Umm...so which is it? Zero regulations on firearms....or regulations on firearms?

 

[FullMonte]

Would anyone here trust Joe Biden in his current state to manage your household finances or pick up your kids from school and drive them home?

Would you trust Trump to pick up your attractive 13 year old daughter from school and drive her home?

 

[DaveXA]

Would you trust Trump to pick up your attractive 13 year old daughter from school and drive her home?

Not in a million years.

 

[Sun Waves]

Would you trust Trump to pick up your attractive 13 year old daughter from school and drive her home?

B..b...but what about DrUmpfff???

 

[Farb]

Umm...so which is it? Zero regulations on firearms....or regulations on firearms?

I personally don't think criminals should be allowed to own a firearm. That is a right afforded a citizen that has signed on to the social contract. If they break the law, they forfeit that right. Having said that, a criminal should be behind bars or more that likely, in a mental institution and they don't allow firearms in their facilities.

 

[FullMonte]

B..b...but what about DrUmpfff???

LOL....so, I assume the answer is "no."

Why is it that you can ask if someone would allow Biden to pick up their child from school, and that's ok....but if I ask you the same question about Trump, it's an issue?

 

[FullMonte]

I personally don't think criminals should be allowed to own a firearm. That is a right afforded a citizen that has signed on to the social contract. If they break the law, they forfeit that right. Having said that, a criminal should be behind bars or more that likely, in a mental institution and they don't allow firearms in their facilities.

So you believe that there should be regulations on guns.

 

[samiam5211]

LOL....so, I assume the answer is "no."

Why is it that you can ask if someone would allow Biden to pick up their child from school, and that's ok....but if I ask you the same question about Trump, it's an issue?

I think if they are voting for president based on the same qualifications they would use to pick a school bus driver, they are doing it wrong.

 

[Farb]

So you believe that there should be regulations on guns.

Law abiding citizens, no regulations. Criminals, yes.

Problem is the left wants to regulate legal citizens in the hope that the criminals don't get them. That doesn't work.

 

[FullMonte]

Law abiding citizens, no regulations. Criminals, yes.

Problem is the left wants to regulate legal citizens in the hope that the criminals don't get them. That doesn't work.

Ok...I just wanted to make sure I understood your position since you said you wanted ZERO regulations on guns, and then said that felons shouldn't be able to own guns.

So, your position is that we should have laws that say "As long as you are law-abiding citizen, you can do whatever you want with a gun, but if you are not a law abiding citizen, then you have to follow these laws"??

As for the left wanting to regulate legal citizens in the hope that criminals don't get them...that doesn't work statement...By your logic, we shouldn't have laws against drunk driving. The government is regulating legal citizens in the hope that drunk drivers don't drive drunk.

 

[Sun Waves]

LOL....so, I assume the answer is "no."

Why is it that you can ask if someone would allow Biden to pick up their child from school, and that's ok....but if I ask you the same question about Trump, it's an issue?

I asked a question relating to Biden's mental state and instead of defending Biden you brought up Trump. We all know Biden is showing signs of dementia.

 

[Farb]

Ok...I just wanted to make sure I understood your position since you said you wanted ZERO regulations on guns, and then said that felons shouldn't be able to own guns.

So, your position is that we should have laws that say "As long as you are law-abiding citizen, you can do whatever you want with a gun, but if you are not a law abiding citizen, then you have to follow these laws"??

As for the left wanting to regulate legal citizens in the hope that criminals don't get them...that doesn't work statement...By your logic, we shouldn't have laws against drunk driving. The government is regulating legal citizens in the hope that drunk drivers don't drive drunk.

You mean in the country we live right now? I can hope for a better world as I see it, in the mean time, I am forced to live under the current set of laws. So, Yes.

Only if that law is worded exactly you just said above. It is perfect.

Remind me what amendment gives a citizen the right to drive a car?

 

[Farb]

And just like that, it was the GOP that were responsible for the 'defund the police' movement. LOL.

And what is sad, people will flip over themselves to try and defend this and actually believe it.