I think that’s a rephrasing of my post. When I meet someone out and about at a pub having a drink (considering in vino veritas) and I hear the rhetoric of racism and most of the other slurred discriminatory commentary, I don’t argue, I simply figure I am not dealing with a rational thinker, and given that, there is nothing further of value to be gained, so any further conversation or interaction in any other context is pointless. As for discrediting them, their open rhetoric does that by itself to any rational thinker. I say, the more people are free to speak whatever they wish, the more they reveal who they are. Again, knowledge is power. Just an aside, when I was 12 or 13 in Belfast, Northern Ireland, I heard a recording of MLK’s I Have a Dream speech. While I figured he was an American, I had no idea at the time he was black or the context of his speech... I remember my initial thoughts were he’s talking about us...a brilliant speech.
Unlike the NRA, anitfa actually meets the definition. If local government is colluding with a violent group of thugs and doesn't act until their victims fight back, the Feds could define them as domestic terrorists in order to have the justification for federal action. Although I suppose the Feds could use civil rights laws as well.
Not at all, the sale must be completed by an FFL and a background check must be run prior to the completion of the sale.
Local officials that encourage crime could already be defined as members of a corrupt criminal organization and prosecuted by the Feds.
Quick question for you. Do you believe in the idea that folks are innocent until beyond a reasonable doubt the state proves their crime? That doesn't stipulate that they might or may in the future commit a crime, but that they have and with proof the state denied them their liberties. And to be clear, what you're advocating here is the ultimate destruction of presumed innocence. Why is that so important to you folks?
Human beings are always vulnerable to reason over time. Many are even more likely to listen after a drink or two - after 4 most are a lost cause.
Let me ask the question differently. If I had an inkling that you "might" or "may" commit a crime, can I take away your right to vote? If not, why not?
You get it - as usual. "The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization." Wiki
Incorrect, Assault Weapons being select fire have not been used in any of the recent mass shootings, primarily because obtaining one is extremely expensive and requires one to go through a BATF approval process that takes about 6 months.
yes, but only people playing dumb don't know what kinda guns we talking about https://www.thefreedictionary.com/assault+rifle " 1. A rifle that has a detachable magazine and is capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, designed for individual use in combat. 2. An assault weapon having a rifled bore and a shoulder stock. "
This, from a city that uses it’s public ways as open sewers. Yeah, ok. I hunted most of my life... I am sure PETA would consider me a terrorist.
how about the las vegas shooting - that was definitely the type of weapon we are talking about making harder to buy
you do realize there are many different definitions used by the public right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon "Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms. The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions but usually includes semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine, a pistol grip and sometimes other features such as a vertical forward grip, flash suppressor or barrel shroud."
