The Unofficial *Official* Politics Thread

[Ronkh]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnY4HyofnoU

[Ronkh]

" You’ve shown me since birth that fame rates more than merit. Bring terror? Who cares? I’m trending. Looking good, Kylie and Kim. Where’s the magazine covers for the girl who works a soup kitchen? "

https://stream.org/why-are-you-surprised/

[JBM]

Seeing how the FISA warrant was obtained we need more people with guns. Good thing Hilary lost or this country wouldn’t be reparable.

[Ronkh]

If the indicted Russians came over in 2014, who allowed it?
Who was in charge in 2014? Who let the Russians in and why?
As an aside, Trump didn`t announce his candidacy til mid 2015.
Minor details...

[Setec Astronomy]

If the indicted Russians came over in 2014, who allowed it?
Who was in charge in 2014? Who let the Russians in and why?
As an aside, Trump didn`t announce his candidacy til mid 2015.
Minor details...

Unfortunately they [the FBI] were too busy trying to find a way to blame Russia for their girl losing

Yeah, that`s what Obama did after dinner, he personally reviewed visa applications. So...it was the Deep State who "let" the Russians in so they could defeat "their girl"? What a genius strategy!! FWIW Ron, DJT has been running for President, on and off, since 1999 (he won two primaries vying to be the Reform Party candidate), and musing about it since 1988, so 2014 would not be too early...besides he was in Moscow in 2013 for the Miss Universe Pageant...IIRC he claimed to have talked to Putin then, of course he also claimed to have been on 60 Minutes with him and they got along great, even though their segments were filmed on opposite sides of the Atlantic, so who knows what happened in 2013.

EDIT: And besides, there is always the possibility this is how it played out...2014...Russians figure Hillary is going to be the Dem nominee, they don`t want her, so they plan to interfere with the election, not knowing who else is going to be running or successful, at that time...as time goes on they decide they like Trump, and they decide they would rather have him or Bernie...isn`t it also possible that if they had gotten Bernie to beat Hillary in the primaries, that they might have backed him in the general?

You know sometimes I decide I`m going to polish and wax my car, but I don`t decide which wax I`m going to use until after I`m done polishing...I`m not sure how the Russians deciding to meddle or try to defeat a certain candidate precludes them from deciding later which candidate they want to win.

[Setec Astronomy]

I’ve seen comments on the forum regarding not being able to trust other gun owners.

I AM NOT THE PROBLEM, my guns are not the problem and when it comes to gun ownership there are tens of millions of people just like me. Don’t give me this garbage about assault weapons and which guns I can own. Any weapon and I mean any weapon, (think screwdriver) used to assault someone is an assault weapon.

I`m not going to go back through 65 pages of posts, but I must have missed the ones that suggested that you or Ron are untrustworthy or "the problem".

I’m all for background checks and have been through many. The government has anything that they could possibly want regarding my personal information. The FBI has performed intensive background checks on me, my fingerprints are on file. They have personal letters stating my purpose for ownership signed with a local Police Chiefs approval, meaning there was a personal interview with these law enforcement officials. They have my name, my address, my social security number, my passport number. They know how much I make, how much I pay in taxes. They know my parents names, my children’s names, my spouse. They know which firearms I own. Some of these firearms took between 3 and 6 months to obtain permission to own, I’m patient. I don’t take these things to be a burden it’s all part of lawful ownership. I’ve taken the appropriate courses and tests to qualify for a CCP. I’ve qualified at high levels shooting IDPA. Seriously, I don’t know what more info I could give them.

Again, how has it been suggested that YOU should give more information or go through more training or background checks? Perhaps if the Florida shooter, or other mass shooters, had gone through a fraction of the checks that you describe, HE would have been unable to obtain the weapon he used--that`s completely different from keeping YOU from buying a weapon of your choice.

Is it impossible to see the difference between yourself and one of these mass shooters? Your argument sounds a little bit complaining about the police doing drunk driving enforcement...when you never drink and drive. Or complaining about how you might have to wait 2 weeks after your birthday to get your driver`s license because that`s the first day you could schedule a test.

So what would happen to you or Ron`s ability to buy your weapon of choice, if in Florida, or any state, really, in order to buy a semi-automatic weapon (let`s for the sake of argument say that includes a handgun or an "assault rifle"), you had to interview with a police investigator, and he had to speak to your wife/gf and employer or parents/school principal (if you are 19 and still in high school)? That would seemingly have no impact on you, since that`s all been done, hopefully would have no impact on Ron, but might have kept this recent Florida kid from getting his weapon, or other recent wife-beating shooters from getting a weapon.

I take your point about what is the definition of "assault weapon", but I think you would have to admit that this recent Florida kid was more efficient with his AR-15 or whatever it was than he would have been with a screwdriver. Would he have been able to get his count up to 17 with a screwdriver or a knife?

[Setec Astronomy]

Thought for the day--if you are 19 and live in Florida, you can`t buy a beer, but you can buy a semi-automatic weapon. You may not be able to buy cigarettes soon, either Florida may raise tobacco-buying age to 21 - Orlando Sentinel , but you`ll still be able to buy a semi-automatic weapon.

[GearHead_1]

@Setec Astronomy, My post was written while I considered several recent thoughts posted in this thread but primarily meant to convey my feelings on only a few issues. These are: you can’t penalize the legal law-abiding gun owners to hamstring the criminal, that there is only so far you can go with background checks and registration and that the type or quantity of guns (i.e. the so-called assault weapon) owned by law-abiding citizens will not change the issues we face today. Admittedlly, I’m no wordsmith and often fall short when conveying in writing what I’m thinking.

I`m not going to go back through 65 pages of posts, but I must have missed the ones that suggested that you or Ron are untrustworthy or "the problem".

A few posts back it was suggested that it had been proven we can not trust another. In this post I (can’t speak for Ron) am suggesting that I’m the average gun owner. I further assert that we (the average owners) are not the problem and that blanket legislation affects every gun owner.

I think we`ve proven that over and over again. We can`t trust one another to be responsible with them. I only trust LFE and military (even ex) to be responsible to with them.

Again, how has it been suggested that YOU should give more information or go through more training or background checks?

Gun control changes are typically considered in one of two ways, making it harder to get the firearm or limiting the firearms that you are allowed to own. I’m simply making a case that there are procedures in place that make it so one can’t simply pick one up off of the shelf and walk out the door. In stating the checks I’ve been through my point was to say, for what? How does all of this available information make a difference in the way I own a firearm or the type I own? Since MY firearms are not a threat to anyone why should anyone care what I own. Changing the laws to acquire or own firearms affects all gun owners. I am one of the the all, I am the YOU to which you refer, changing either of these affects ME.

Perhaps if the Florida shooter, or other mass shooters, had gone through a fraction of the checks that you describe, HE would have been unable to obtain the weapon he used--that`s completely different from keeping YOU from buying a weapon of your choice.

As indicated, I’m all for background checks but to my point, I’ve been through enough.

Is it impossible to see the difference between yourself and one of these mass shooters?

Absolutely, it’s the way I was raised, the things in which I believe and simply said, how I think. I see myself as part of a community and accept the responsibilities that go along with it.

Your argument sounds a little bit complaining about the police doing drunk driving enforcement...when you never drink and drive. Or complaining about how you might have to wait 2 weeks after your birthday to get your driver`s license because that`s the first day you could schedule a test.

Sorry, I have no idea where you are going with this. I indicated that I do not have a problem waiting for a background check to go through.

So what would happen to you or Ron`s ability to buy your weapon of choice, if in Florida, or any state, really, in order to buy a semi-automatic weapon (let`s for the sake of argument say that includes a handgun or an "assault rifle"), you had to interview with a police investigator, and he had to speak to your wife/gf and employer or parents/school principal (if you are 19 and still in high school)? That would seemingly have no impact on you, since that`s all been done, hopefully would have no impact on Ron, but might have kept this recent Florida kid from getting his weapon, or other recent wife-beating shooters from getting a weapon.

As I indicated, I’m all for background checks and I have no issues with involved background checks. That said, I’ve done that and can’t see how I could make information more available and don’t know of what real use it would be? Realistically, I don’t see a way to make every background check as involved as the list I’ve mentioned and I don’t think these steps are all necessary for simple gun ownership. We already know that we don’t even follow the red flags we have now when they’re right in front of us. More legislation will not change this. If we can’t do the “easy” do we really think we will do the “more difficult? Can you imagine the burden it would put on local law enforcement to interview a citizen for each and every gun purchase? Who would you have absorb the costs associated with these detailed checks, the law-abiding citizen? You may not think this but others do.

I take your point about what is the definition of "assault weapon", but I think you would have to admit that this recent Florida kid was more efficient with his AR-15 or whatever it was than he would have been with a screwdriver. Would he have been able to get his count up to 17 with a screwdriver or a knife?

I cannot concede this point, one of the recent posts in this thread linked to an incident in China where more than 30 were killed with a knife. Bombs could easily boost that number. Where there is a will there is a way and the next choice of implementation beyond a gun may be more or less deadly.

At the end of the day, I suspect you and I both know that we won’t write that one particular thing that gives the other one an epiphany moment. We see things the way we do. That’s why there will always be two sides of the isle.

I’m sure I’ve written quite enough. Now stepping off of my soapbox.

[nickclark08]

Setec, I don’t necessarily disagree with you on a few points, but playing devils advocate-

at 18 you can also be tried as an adult in court, volunteer/draft into the military, etc. I could also make the argument that the age for buying beer and other things should actually be lowered to 18 as a counterpoint using the same Logic.

If the end goal is to restrict semi-auto gun ownership, an arbitrary line in the sand regarding age isn’t really going to solve much in reality. I can make cases for 18 year olds I know that would be perfectly mature enough to drink beer and own a semi-auto, and people at the age of 40 I would say no way.

[jrock645]

How is it that the liberal geniuses are so worked up on semi auto weapons with pistol grips but seem to be ok with pistols? Seems like either being really dumb, or a sneaky backdoor way of actually wanting to ban basically all guns.

[artm3]

100% certainty it had an impact
how much is the question: 1 vote or 1 mil

tge total delta pa, wi and mi was 77000 out of 14 million votes ~ 0.5%
those 3 states were the most heavily targeted by russia
not too hard to imagine the russian campaign making a 0.25% chande, 0.5% swing
there is a reason bils are spent on political campaigns

total votes ... D....R....3rd party in mil...total
2008.......69.5...,60....1.8....131.3
2012.......66......61.....2.....129
2160.......65.9....63....8.2....137.1

take aways
2008 vs 2016 4.6% more voters, population 10.7%
obama got 10% > gump with less voters

2012 vs 2016 6.3% more voters, population 2.9%
obama vs trump, 5% more with 6% less voters

even clinton got 3 mil more

the sole factor:no, others
dnc email hacking by the russians
russian $$ to nra
russian internet campaign
comey reopening email investigation 1.5 week before election against unwritten
rules
obama not releasing the dossier and info on russian hacking (he did the right thing)
voter suppression efforts
3rd party (stein buddies with putin, took $$$ ?)

could the totality of the russian effort have swing the election? absolutely
they did it for a reason

there is a deep dark state....they put gump in office, objectives
ease sanctions, they are killing russia, more to come now
access ro russian oil
tax cuts (10 people alone are getting over 20% of the individual cuts)
environmental rules abolished
impose one ideologies morays on all
allow israel to deal once and for all with the palestinians

imo the ruskies have leverage on dump
he could not get a loan from a us bank(and he is heavily leveraged)
he defaulted and sued deutsch bank
deutsch bank opens office in russia (us banks prohibited by sanctions)
now they give the guy (and son in law) loansl/line of credit at below market rates
why? russian gangsters back them with cash

why not clinton? she was going after putin and his cronies $$$
panama papers, putin may be the richest person in the world, by several orders, by taking food out of the peoples mouth

summary
I`m not changing anyone`s mind
I doubt they can change their own: health, weight, drugs, smoking, booze, wife abuse, financial responsibility, et al

I`m covered no matter what, got $$$, kids are educated and self sufficient

we are all subject to the foibles of this immoral clown
cuttaxes and raise spending:1987, 2007 ring a bell?

our only hope is meuller doing his job

[artm3]

Wow!

it is likely only a surprise to you
not to anyone who reads your pontifications

[artm3]

talk about fake new
all you guys got are lies

Fake news says Michelle Obama blamed Donald Trump for Florida shooting | PunditFact


[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.862745)]Share The Facts[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.862745)]
usdeplorablesnews.com
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.541176)]Fake news blogger[/COLOR]

[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.862745)][/COLOR]

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.862745)]Says Michelle Obama said Florida shooting "is clearly our president’s fault." [/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.541176)]In an article on a fake news website. – Thursday, February 15, 2018 [/COLOR]

[GearHead_1]

talk about fake new
all you guys got are lies...

You guys? Who guys?

[Setec Astronomy]

How is it that the liberal geniuses are so worked up on semi auto weapons with pistol grips but seem to be ok with pistols? Seems like either being really dumb, or a sneaky backdoor way of actually wanting to ban basically all guns.

I think the liberal geniuses are worked up about kids getting shot, shouldn`t everybody be worked up about that?